3 ms·
IIRC, (most?) browsers will still send the referrer (sorry, "referer") if you're going HTTPS->HTTPS, so if your your site is using SSL, you'll still get to see
by AgentConundrum 15y ago
IIRC, (most?) browsers will still send the referrer (sorry, "referer") if you're going HTTPS->HTTPS, so if your your site is using SSL, you'll still get to see the referral data, wouldn't you? Whereas HTTPS->HTTP won't send referrer data and businesses would lose valuable information.
Perhaps this provides an incentive for sites to start serving HTTPS-Only, or at least showing Google only the SSL version (e.g. showing rel='canonical' with the HTTPS link). On the other hand, Google is still disincentivizing use of SSL through AdSense, which I believe is still HTTP-Only.
Even with the AdSense disincentive, it could still help. Knowing your referrer keywords is much more important to businesses than AdSense, and it's a very good thing for a site that wants my money to be served by HTTPS-Only, since you can MITM a site easier if there are any HTTP-Only pages on said site.
Sites relying heavily on AdSense, OTOH, would be more likely to be ad-supported rather than product sales-supported, and thus would have less need to be fully secured, since you're less likely to enter sensitive information there (excepting, of course, people who stubbornly reuse the same password everywhere).
I'd like to see this lead to a push of vendors who both sell a product and use AdSense to demand Google support SSL for AdSense, since they would need both referrer data and AdSense to survive. Once Google cracks and adds SSL support to AdWords, smaller sites will be more inclined to offer there content as HTTPS-Only.
It's a step in the right direction, at least.
- JonnieCache 15y ago>the referrer (sorry, "referer") It isn't even an americanism, its a straight-up misspelling. Every time I have to type it I die a little inside. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_referrer#Origin_of_the_term_referer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_referrer#Origin_of_the_ter...
- AgentConundrum 15y ago> Every time I have to type it I die a little inside. I rarely spell it "properly" on the first attempt. My brain just auto-corrects it as I type. I try to think of it as an inside joke or something, but - as you can see from my previous comment - it doesn't stop me from being snarky about it.
- burgerbrain 15y agoEnglish is a living language. If that's how people start spelling the word, then that is how the word is spelled. I know, you get far more entertainment for your buck complaining, but even so, who cares? Side note: many things commonly refered to as "americanisms" cannot be accurately described as such. See color/colour. Pedants beware.
- JonnieCache 15y ago>If that's how people start spelling the word, then that is how the word is spelled. I quite agree. Unfortunately, there aren't any people that spell the word with three Rs, only HTTP parsers, and I draw the line at bending my conception of language to the will of inanimate agents, as inevitable as this may turn out to be. >but even so, who cares? Let's make a deal, I'll stop being irrationally emotional about spelling when everyone else stops being irrationally emotional about brace placement. Cool? ;)
- bluedanieru 15y agoThis isn't a bunch of schoolchildren inventing new words or some literary movement to change the spelling of a class of words. This is one mistake by a dude who wrote something years ago that now everyone has to duplicate. It is a terrible example of "living language".
- bonzoesc 15y agoIs it? When I'm writing about somebody who refers another person somewhere, I use "referrer." When I write about HTTP headers, I use "referer," even outside of code (i.e. in chat or prose). They're distinct concepts that now have distinct (but homophonic) words.