Intent to deprecate: Insecure HTTP

Re:Intent to deprecate: Insecure HTTP by IgorPartola on Monday April 13, 2015 @02:37PM (#9369474)

Yes it does. For the umpteenth time, an unencrypted HTTP session allows an attacker to inject arbitrary content into the request/response stream. They can use this to do anything, from asking you to log in, sending them the password, to stealing credit card numbers, to presenting fraudulent content, to giving false information, to tracking you, to hijacking links from the page you are trying to view, to just showing you ads where there should be none, to defrauding the site/domain owner (via serving bogus content instead of your own).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Intent to deprecate: Insecure HTTP by spdustin on Monday April 13, 2015 @04:06PM (#9370093)

And a MITM'd captive portal can do the same over SSL against users who don't understand the gravity of whatever warning their browser shows. For HTTPS to be everywhere, there needs to be zero reliance on certifying authorities that your uncle and grandmother have never heard of, zero dialogs/UI indicators that they'll just learn to ignore anyway, and zero effort to maintain the server-side of it.

It's a much bigger challenge, and I find it wildly cavalier for anyone to say "just use HTTPS everywhere" without directly addressing the faults pointed out by others. And by addressing, I don't mean dismissing out of hand.

Hell, I'd settle for acknowledging instead of addressing some days. There are real world problems on both sides that need to be considered.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Intent to deprecate: Insecure HTTP by IgorPartola on Monday April 13, 2015 @11:21PM (#9371950)

I am acknowledging that there are issues with the CA system, and elsewhere have proposed plans for how to eliminate them from our trust chains (tldr: registrars issue you a CA that's only good for the domain you bought from them; then you are your own min-CA).

But these are two separate issues. Going from plain HTTP and HTTPS to HTTPS-only is a step in the right direction. It's also step 1. Step 2 is to drop CA's and work out a better trust system that relies on less parties being involved.

Also, let's give people some credit. Yes, some people ignore the self-signed cert warning. Some people also respond to Nigerian prince emails. We aren't talking about cutting off email because someone might get hurt. Unless you are ready to drop all untrusted certs, those dialogs need to stay in place.

[ Parent | on HN ]