Why are we charging extra for SSL?

Re:Why are we charging extra for SSL? by hahaiamatwork on Monday December 05, 2011 @08:23AM (#3314453)

Because IP addresses are hard to get? Because SSL adds computational overhead? Because it requires extra staff time to renew certificates? Because storing keys and even CSRs adds to the security budget and staff training?

Is it just me or is anyone else tired of these blogs on Hacker News? It seems that anyone who has a website and some time can get their opinion to the top of the list.

I should try it.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why are we charging extra for SSL? by CJefferson on Monday December 05, 2011 @08:38AM (#3314500)

I think the problem (with Hacker News) is that the front page cycles too quickly. There just aren't that many informative bits of news, or blog posts, every day.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why are we charging extra for SSL? by sdfjkl on Monday December 05, 2011 @08:42AM (#3314515)

There is the inexplicably unadvertised news.ycombinator.com/best for a slower cycle. I prefer it.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why are we charging extra for SSL? by nik_0_0 on Monday December 05, 2011 @04:44PM (#3316645)

I was also unnerved by the fast cycling, and looking for something just like this. Inexplicably unadvertised indeed, thanks!

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why are we charging extra for SSL? by RKearney on Monday December 05, 2011 @08:44AM (#3314527)

SSL isn't actually as computationally expensive as it used to be. Sure back when hardware wasn't as advanced as it is now, but you can no longer factor SSL into significant CPU cycles.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why are we charging extra for SSL? by hahaiamatwork on Monday December 05, 2011 @09:48AM (#3314752)

This is fairly true, but it's still a potential factor depending on your SaaS setup.

[ Parent | on HN ]