6 ms·

I suppose you have some encryption in this (I'm no expert), I'm only arguing against encrypting the full body, because for larger downloads, full-body encryptio

• vtlynch 11y ago
  Except even Netflix has recently announced they are going to be performing "Full Body" encryption on their video streams and that it was financially worth it for them to do so. You can make value based arguments for/against pervasive encryption, but technical arguments against it continue to be debunked.
  • untitaker_ 11y ago
    Not sure where you get the idea that anecdotes count as "technical arguments", but let's stay with the Netflix example: According to another comment in this thread, Netflix measured severe performance drops with SSL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9465553 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9465553
    • vtlynch 11y ago
      Not sure how one of the largest sites on the internet with intensive bandwidth successfully implementing encryption is anecdotal. Performance drop or not, they implemented it because they find the benefits to outweigh the costs. Netflix, and many others before them, have demonstrated it is possible to do so. Obviously there is an impact. But many people like to immediately say, "its too resource intensive! it cant be done! its not practical". Those people are wrong. It's expensive. It may take engineers. But it can be done.