3 ms·

You don't care if your blog's content gets MITM'd?

• josefx 6y ago
  You mean like by someone throwing up a huge warning that this page is made by the devil himself and unless he recites the right combination of holy words there is nothing you can do to access it? Ran into a few pages that were hijacked that way, some of them at least seemed to go to the expected content when I got rid of the https.
  • prepend 6y ago
    There’s certainly risk, but I don’t think converting all traffic to ssl is worth it to mitigate the risk. I’ve never run into this situation in many years.
    • josefx 6y ago
      My comment was actually meant to be sarcastic and a bit over the top. The hijacker in this case would be the browser telling me that the page is not secure and as far as I remember valid certs are enforced to the point where a user can't bypass the error in some cases. In my experience https has always been more of a hurdle when I was looking for some obscure information hidden away on barely maintained websites.
      • prepend 6y ago
        I remember where it used to be fun to do stuff like that, or reverse all the images in pages, etc so thought it was a reference to just general monkeying around with http traffic that won’t work with https. I get maybe 20 hits a year so I would probably think it funny if someone was interested enough to do this.
• prepend 6y ago
  No. It’s just static content, there’s no registration and all usage is anonymous. I collect no data. Someone can mitm if they wish, although there’s little motivation. The risk of harm is that someone could try to misrepresent content or something, but again who has motivation and even if they did it would eventually be repaired.