5 ms·
It obviously is. Having just an HTML site now becomes more expensive for no clear reason. Which makes more sense for people to check out Gemini.
by jevgeni 6y ago
It obviously is. Having just an HTML site now becomes more expensive for no clear reason. Which makes more sense for people to check out Gemini.
- dewey 6y agoWhat makes it more expensive? A certificate is free (With LE or self-signed), the performance impact is negligible and there's a clear reason for why everyone should be using it.
- oofoe 6y agoIt does add a "tax" of sort in the form time or attention that must be paid to keep a website up. You can't just sling some files in a directory and be done -- you have to pay for certificates or pay (in time and executable capability) to keep LetsEncrypt up to date. And, as wonderful as LetsEncrypt is, it's not forever. At some point, they're gonna' get tired of messing with it or it will get taken over by private equity (see .org) and for whatever reason, it won't work any more. And sure, that's always been true, new stuff obsoletes old and things fall by the wayside. But my current browser can access modern websites as well as sites from the dawn of the Web. But FireFox 85, 87 or 90 will probably make https mandatory -- and that amazing continuity is gone.
- MaxBarraclough 6y agoThere are good reasons to insist on the use of HTTPS for all sites on the public web, with no exceptions or excuses. This topic has cropped up before: • https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21912817 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21912817 • https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24640183 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24640183 • https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22147858 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22147858
- jevgeni 6y agoThese links list literally SOME and not ALL cases that need encryption.
- MaxBarraclough 6y agoI'm afraid I don't see your point here, please elaborate.
- jevgeni 6y agoYour point is "this should be applied to ALL sites", while your argument for it is "because it is relevant for SOME sites".
- MaxBarraclough 6y agoNot so. In the top link, points 2, 3, and 5, apply to all public websites.
- jevgeni 6y agoYou cannot say that certificates are reliably free (especially in the long run), if there's only one entity providing them and that entity is dependent on corporate sponsors.
- josephcsible 6y agoWe can't say that a true statement is true just because there's a chance that at some point it becomes false?
- jevgeni 6y agoBy that logic Lehman Brothers stock was a great investment on the 14 September 2008.
- snazz 6y agoTons of major websites rely on Let's Encrypt, so I think it's fair to say that they're probably not going anywhere soon. Free certificates are now standard on services like Cloudflare and Google App Engine. I think that AWS can generate free ones too.
- romwell 6y agoNot everyone needs HTTPS, in spite of what the HN mantra says. Some websites are the equivalents of billboards. The cost is dependence on a central authority that can make your site inaccessible in a whim.
- snazz 6y agoYou're aware that Gemini mandates a recent version of TLS in the protocol specification, right?
- jevgeni 6y agoSelf-signed certificates are first class citizens. Section 4.2 of the spec.