10 ms·
Yea, but the web server delivering them is now google. Google now gets the access logs and using the persistent tls socket can follow the users activity. Sure t
by cflat 6y ago
Yea, but the web server delivering them is now google. Google now gets the access logs and using the persistent tls socket can follow the users activity. Sure the content is signed, but the delivery is no longer private.
- Spivak 6y agoBecause of CDNs the delivery was never all that private to begin with.
- cflat 6y agoCDNs are a known commodity with business relationships. You can’t have an unknown CDN in the mix. They are an extension of your infrastructure and you can control if they are or aren’t in the path of control. They key here is that there is also a legal and business relationship.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- dlubarov 6y ago> Google now gets the access logs It doesn't seem like this would materially change the information Google receives. The status quo is that Google knows (via redirect links) what search results I click and when. It doesn't technically know what data the website will send me, but normally it's the same as Google's cached copy. It doesn't know what resources my browser will block, but in a bundle scenario, my browser is free to ignore resources even if they must be transmitted as part of a bundle. > using the persistent tls socket can follow the users activity Even if this caused browsers to keep idle sockets to Google alive more often, what information is there to be gained from an idle socket?