> And it's not like TLS 1.0 and 1.1 are somehow worse than cleartext communication. In reality humans can't actually do this nuance you're imagining, and so wh

> And it's not like TLS 1.0 and 1.1 are somehow worse than cleartext communication. In reality humans can't actually do this nuance you're imagining, and so what happens is you're asked "is this secure?" and you say "Yes" meaning "Well it's not cleartext" and then it gets ripped wide open. HTTP in particular is like a dream protocol for cryptanalysis. If in 1990 you told researchers to imagine a protocol where clients will execute arbitrary numbers of requests to any server under somebody else's control (Javascript) and where values you control are concatenated with secrets you want to steal (Cookies) they'd say that's nice for writing examples, but nobody would deploy such an amateur design in the real world. They would be dead wrong. But eh, we wrote an RFC telling you not to use these long obsolete protocol versions, and you're going to do it anyway, so, whatever.