3 ms·
It's amazing how you can redeclare the meaning of words and distort reality just to fit your narrative. Stripping encryption implies that there was, at some po
by rakoo 10y ago
It's amazing how you can redeclare the meaning of words and distort reality just to fit your narrative.
Stripping encryption implies that there was, at some point, some sort of encryption between the browser and the website itself, which there never ever was. In the Cloudflare architecture the browser never ever interacts with the website, always with the Cloudflare servers. When you've got the small lock, it never implied that you were connecting to the website, but always that you were connecting to what lies behind the domain name, which is the Cloudflare servers. As an additional point, the website owner has always agreed to use this architecture; they're not somehow victim of some kind of attack from a spooky middleman. They ask (heck, some of them even pay) for it. It is part of the way they want to serve content.
You should tone down the sentimental analysis and keep to the facts. Cloudflare is a reverse proxy service the website owner uses; it is part of their infrastructure.
- CPLX 10y ago> In the Cloudflare architecture the browser never ever interacts with the website, always with the Cloudflare servers. Indeed. It's almost as if metaphorically speaking they were standing there between them... like a man... in the middle...
- deno 10y agoThe name on the certificate is not Cloudflare’s. It’s origin’s. There’s no legitimate mechanism for reverse proxies to operate HTTPs sites, other than to act as a dumb pipe. Calling it MITM is therefore entirely appropriate. Whether this protocol abuse is sanctioned by origin or not is entirely beside the point.