> But these parties can’t see the pages you visit on those sites (e.g. wikipedia.org/controversial-topic) This is... not entirely wrong, but overly simplified.

> But these parties can’t see the pages you visit on those sites (e.g. wikipedia.org/controversial-topic) This is... not entirely wrong, but overly simplified. My impression is that TLS fingerprinting is sometimes-to-often good enough to figure out which exact page of a static website that a user is visiting[0]. That's not to say TLS is useless, or that the fingerprinting isn't hard enough that some adversaries won't just give up, it's just that the protections are more complicated, and it's not quite as simple as just saying, "I have TLS, I'm fine." [0]: http://rabexc.org/posts/guessing-tls-pages http://rabexc.org/posts/guessing-tls-pages