Yes, the phrasing "secure/insecure" is an abbreviation that loses a lot of meaning, but to dismiss TLS based on that seems dishonest. Even if you don't care abo

Yes, the phrasing "secure/insecure" is an abbreviation that loses a lot of meaning, but to dismiss TLS based on that seems dishonest. Even if you don't care about your user's privacy, don't you at least want the authenticity and integrity TLS provides? The author doesn't only acknowledge MitM, but even show an example where they themselves are MitM'd. Those same anti-TLS arguments have been rehashed often enough by now.