4 ms·

> Today only 0.5% of HTTPS connections made by Chrome use TLS 1.0 or 1.1. It's nice to have this stat from Google. A lot of people make wild claims about how w

by Panino 8y ago

> Today only 0.5% of HTTPS connections made by Chrome use TLS 1.0 or 1.1. It's nice to have this stat from Google. A lot of people make wild claims about how widely used TLS 1.0 is based on a glance at their webserver logs. But if you look more closely you'll see that a large percentage of 1.0 traffic is actually just hacked machines scanning for vulnerabilities, filling your logs and using your resources. It's not real traffic, and TLS 1.1 is microscopic in comparison to 1.0. As a percentage, very few sites would be harmed by disabling 1.0/1.1. Most sites can simplify their TLS stack and lose more bad than good by going TLS 1.2-only. So I'm very glad to see Google deprecating and planning to disable 1.0/1.1. To see the disabling of 1.0/1.1 over time check out SSL Pulse from SSL Labs (in the chart "Protocol Support"): https://www.ssllabs.com/ssl-pulse/ https://www.ssllabs.com/ssl-pulse/ TLS 1.0 has been dropping like a rock. Maybe it's too late to be an "early adopter" of 1.2-only but regardless I think tech sites/people should lead the way there.

Twirrim 8y ago
PCI-DSS standards require companies to drop support for TLS 1.0 (though the deadline did get extended to June 2018), which will be probably one of the more significant driving factors. Most people just won't bother to change their configurations, short of some kind of external pressure. Support for new protocols will often be driven by "Is it supported out of the box" on appliances, Apache, Nginx etc. shipped by distributions. edit: HTTP 2.0 support at 31%? That's higher than I expected, and a good sight to see. Wonder how much of that is driven by cloudflare etc?
dsl 8y ago
As someone who scans the internet (but not with hacked machines), I try every version of TLS to determine support. If you support older versions I scan more frequently to see when they are turned off. Feel free to point to this comment as evidence that logs should not be trusted.
- comboy 8y ago
  Do you publish any stats?
  - dsl 8y ago
    Not currently, but I am planning on it when time allows. You can use the email in my profile if you'd like more info.
tialaramex 8y ago
Note that "connections made _by_ some particular web browser" (in this case Chrome) and "connections made _to_ some web site" (and seen in your logs) are not the same kind of thing. Both client and server will try to negotiate the best version they and their peer can manage, but the populations of those peers are different so the statistics are not necessarily well correlated. One problem Chrome doesn't have to worry about, but your site might (especially if its demographics skew towards people with older and possibly out-of-support systems) is out-dated web browsers. Also I'm going to link the diediedie draft, which is now superseded by a version with a more corporate name but I was amused because the IETF's script crashed when trying to render it, so rather than link the current one that doesn't do that here's the original with the funnier name and the crash: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-moriarty-tls-oldversions-diediedie-00 https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-moriarty-tls-oldversions-d...
- michaelmior 8y ago
  > Where necessary, servers may enable both modern and legacy options, to continue to support legacy clients. It looks like you can still have older TLS versions enabled as long as TLS 1.2 or later is supported.
- lathiat 8y ago
  This is important, from a client perspective (e.g. from Chrome) this makes sense. But from a server perspective, you still have trouble with old clients, particularly Windows XP. Slowly disappearing but not gone yet. Fortunately SNI (i.e. not requiring a dedicated IP per SSL customer) is becoming so commonplace that a lot of those browsers are getting broken anyway, which will probably speed up that deprecation.
theandrewbailey 8y ago
I've run TLS 1.2 only on my site for a year or two, and I've not encountered any problems. The ecommerce websites I manage are TLS 1.1 and 1.2 only, and not heard complaints.

by Panino 8y ago

Twirrim 8y ago

PCI-DSS standards require companies to drop support for TLS 1.0 (though the deadline did get extended to June 2018), which will be probably one of the more significant driving factors. Most people just won't bother to change their configurations, short of some kind of external pressure. Support for new protocols will often be driven by "Is it supported out of the box" on appliances, Apache, Nginx etc. shipped by distributions. edit: HTTP 2.0 support at 31%? That's higher than I expected, and a good sight to see. Wonder how much of that is driven by cloudflare etc?

dsl 8y ago

As someone who scans the internet (but not with hacked machines), I try every version of TLS to determine support. If you support older versions I scan more frequently to see when they are turned off. Feel free to point to this comment as evidence that logs should not be trusted.

comboy 8y ago
Do you publish any stats?
- dsl 8y ago
  Not currently, but I am planning on it when time allows. You can use the email in my profile if you'd like more info.

tialaramex 8y ago

Note that "connections made _by_ some particular web browser" (in this case Chrome) and "connections made _to_ some web site" (and seen in your logs) are not the same kind of thing. Both client and server will try to negotiate the best version they and their peer can manage, but the populations of those peers are different so the statistics are not necessarily well correlated. One problem Chrome doesn't have to worry about, but your site might (especially if its demographics skew towards people with older and possibly out-of-support systems) is out-dated web browsers. Also I'm going to link the diediedie draft, which is now superseded by a version with a more corporate name but I was amused because the IETF's script crashed when trying to render it, so rather than link the current one that doesn't do that here's the original with the funnier name and the crash: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-moriarty-tls-oldversions-diediedie-00 https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-moriarty-tls-oldversions-d...

michaelmior 8y ago
> Where necessary, servers may enable both modern and legacy options, to continue to support legacy clients. It looks like you can still have older TLS versions enabled as long as TLS 1.2 or later is supported.
lathiat 8y ago
This is important, from a client perspective (e.g. from Chrome) this makes sense. But from a server perspective, you still have trouble with old clients, particularly Windows XP. Slowly disappearing but not gone yet. Fortunately SNI (i.e. not requiring a dedicated IP per SSL customer) is becoming so commonplace that a lot of those browsers are getting broken anyway, which will probably speed up that deprecation.

theandrewbailey 8y ago

I've run TLS 1.2 only on my site for a year or two, and I've not encountered any problems. The ecommerce websites I manage are TLS 1.1 and 1.2 only, and not heard complaints.