3 ms·

If you think that verifying that a site is using valid SSL is a tool to make sure that a site is taking reasonable safety precautions with your data, you most d

• msandford 12y ago
  Yeah, it's like driving by a house and seeing a sign on the lawn "This house is protected by Brinks" and from that concluding that none of the doors or windows have been accidentally unlocked. It does show some kind of theoretical preference for security but it by no means assures one -- nevermind making any kind of a guarantee -- that said preference has been successfully translated into reality. I would suspect that the rate windows or doors left accidentally unlocked between houses with security systems and without isn't a substantial enough difference to be meaningful. Sure the right might drop in half, but if it's from 4% to 2% that doesn't do much. Having an SSL certificate is really the bare minimum that someone can do to have even a hope of a prayer of keeping data safe. There are about a dozen steps beyond that which must be taken. Worse, the effects are not additive, but multiplicative. If any one particular defense is handled improperly the properly handled other portions lend little/no assistance. Naively one might assume that the total security score might be tabulated this way: ( 1 + 1 + 1 + 0 + 1 + 1 ) / 6 = 0.833 But in fact, it's this way: 1 * 1 * 1 * 0 * 1 * 1 = 0