|
NY Senator wants HTTPS to be default
|
|
The following comments relate to this news article:
article published on 28 February, 2011
New York Senator Charles Schumer has called on America's largest sites to make the HTTPS protocol the default for their sites in an effort to prevent ID theft when users hop on public Wi-Fi at places like Starbucks and McDonalds.
The Senator says the growth of public Wi-Fi spots is making it easier for hackers to steal info like credit card numbers and passwords for banking institutions.
... [ read the full article ]
Please read the original article before posting your comments.
|
Member
|
28. February 2011 @ 18:10 |
Link to this message
|
|
I do not oppose this.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
|
xaznboitx
Senior Member
|
28. February 2011 @ 19:45 |
Link to this message
|
|
still can hack even using that site as default .
|
|
GryphB
Member
|
28. February 2011 @ 21:24 |
Link to this message
|
|
Meh, I don't think it should be mandatory. But those people should realize that they are on someone else's network and are subject to whatever happens.
|
Senior Member
|
28. February 2011 @ 22:01 |
Link to this message
|
Did I step in to the twilight zone or something? A politician said something tech related that makes sense.
Next weeks episode: Sony will start to care about consumers. And even drop all current lawsuits then restore other OS in the next ps3 update.
XXYYQQOO!!! Yeah WELCOME TO JAMROCK
 |
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
1. March 2011 @ 01:36 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by xyqo:
Did I step in to the twilight zone or something? A politician said something tech related that makes sense.
Next weeks episode: Sony will start to care about consumers. And even drop all current lawsuits then restore other OS in the next ps3 update.
LoL...that seems to be the size of it. I am still trying to find the evil and corruption in this plan; after all...it comes from a politician, it can't possibly be a good thing. Maybe he owns stock in a company specializing in secure networks or something.
|
|
ps3lvanub
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
1. March 2011 @ 03:04 |
Link to this message
|
|
Not every single politician is a dickhead... Just 99% of them.
IMPORTANT: If you hate Sony for being so corrupt, copy this image into your signature too! |
|
Clam_Up
Junior Member
|
1. March 2011 @ 03:27 |
Link to this message
|
If it wasn't a politician talking I'd probably be less skeptical. Politicians just like to get their name on as many proposals as possible regardless of how much sense they make.
Besides, how tough is it to see the padlock and the https:// in a browser window? It seems unnecessary to me.
Also, it isn't trivial to set up a secure certificate. It's a few more hoops to be jumped through. I can see quite a few websites that don't do SSL just going offline if it passes. I'd hardly call that progress.
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
1. March 2011 @ 06:03 |
Link to this message
|
Got it...if every site needed an SSL cert, then sites like wikileaks could be in danger of being blocked to the majority of the tech-illiterate public simply by revoking the cert.
I knew that a politician couldn't be doing good!
|
|
molsen
Member
|
1. March 2011 @ 07:36 |
Link to this message
|
It's Schumer, he never does anything for the good of the people. It's a grandstanding tactic to get something else pass. He is bringing this issue to light, so when a bill is created he can add pork to it and use this SSL as the main reason. He has done this many times. I wish people of NY can see this.
|
|
lissenup2
Suspended permanently
|
1. March 2011 @ 13:34 |
Link to this message
|
|
Probably one of the best ideas ever. Never could figure out why this was the de facto from the start. There's no harm in it, no inconvenience and therefore, why not just go this route. Good for that politician. He may be exempt from a public execution.
|
|
Clam_Up
Junior Member
|
1. March 2011 @ 15:43 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by lissenup2:
Probably one of the best ideas ever. Never could figure out why this was the de facto from the start. There's no harm in it, no inconvenience and therefore, why not just go this route. Good for that politician. He may be exempt from a public execution.
Yeah, the more I think about it, the more this scares me. On the surface it looks like a great idea and some will be all for it. But having gone through the process of implementing SSL myself, I can see how it could easily be used to take down sites that aren't "approved of" by whoever in power doesn't like them.
If it's restricted only to the largest sites, that's fine. But will it stay a restriction only for those sites? Who determines which sites must adhere to it and which don't?
Be afraid. Be very afraid.
When laws allow unlimited ownership of ideas, it is to a society as iron fusion is to the core of a star.
When verified realities lead us to anger, we must learn to reevaluate our beliefs.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 1. March 2011 @ 15:58
|
|
ps3lvanub
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
1. March 2011 @ 16:55 |
Link to this message
|
|
I can't see every single site being forced to go secure. It will kill half of the internet.
IMPORTANT: If you hate Sony for being so corrupt, copy this image into your signature too!
|
|
lissenup2
Suspended permanently
|
1. March 2011 @ 19:59 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Clam_Up:
Originally posted by lissenup2:
Probably one of the best ideas ever. Never could figure out why this was the de facto from the start. There's no harm in it, no inconvenience and therefore, why not just go this route. Good for that politician. He may be exempt from a public execution.
Yeah, the more I think about it, the more this scares me. On the surface it looks like a great idea and some will be all for it. But having gone through the process of implementing SSL myself, I can see how it could easily be used to take down sites that aren't "approved of" by whoever in power doesn't like them.
If it's restricted only to the largest sites, that's fine. But will it stay a restriction only for those sites? Who determines which sites must adhere to it and which don't?
Be afraid. Be very afraid.
Never thought of it like this. How depressing.
|
Senior Member
|
3. March 2011 @ 03:15 |
Link to this message
|
Live Free or Die.
The rule above all the rules is: Survive !
Capitalism: Funnel most of the $$$ to the already rich.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 3. March 2011 @ 03:28
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
3. March 2011 @ 06:16 |
Link to this message
|
You don't need to download anything...just type https:// instead of http://
|
Senior Member
|
4. March 2011 @ 11:23 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by ps3lvanub:
Not every single politician is a dickhead... Just 99% of them.
Wrong! 99.9999% are.
|
|
editmon
Junior Member
|
4. March 2011 @ 13:15 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by ps3lvanub:
Not every single politician is a dickhead... Just 99% of them.
Give me a billion dollars and I can get a plush toy in the Oval Office. ;)
|
Senior Member
|
4. March 2011 @ 14:39 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by molsen:
It's Schumer, he never does anything for the good of the people. It's a grandstanding tactic to get something else pass. He is bringing this issue to light, so when a bill is created he can add pork to it and use this SSL as the main reason. He has done this many times. I wish people of NY can see this.
I'll second that!
|
|
stonegod5
Newbie
|
4. March 2011 @ 23:38 |
Link to this message
|
|
Beware of anything this politician says. He is as crooked as they come. There must be something on the back end for him or he would not bother talking about it. There are probably other amendments to the bill that let them (Government) see what you are doing or track you in some way.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
Junior Member
|
5. March 2011 @ 01:47 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by xyqo:
Did I step in to the twilight zone or something? A politician said something tech related that makes sense.
Next weeks episode: Sony will start to care about consumers. And even drop all current lawsuits then restore other OS in the next ps3 update.
It's too late for Sony; they have lost billions of customers worldwide over their behavior this past year.
JV
|
