Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 29th Aug 2008 13:23 UTC, submitted by irbis
Mozilla & Gecko clones Firefox 3.0, released not too long ago, was generally well-received. It added a load of new features, while also providing much-needed speed improvements and better memory management. Some new features, however, have met more resistance - one of them is the rather complicated user interface thrown at users when they reach a website with an invalid or expired SSL certificate.
Thread beginning with comment 328544
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Panajev
Member since:
2008-01-09

If you are connecting to a site that you don't really know then identification serves no purpose *anyway* but encryption may be very useful.


I'd say that encryption would be quite useless in this case unless you are worried that people sniffing on the network might laugh too loudly at the crap the untrusted site is exchanging with you ;) .

Reply Parent Score: 1

braddock Member since:
2005-07-08


I'd say that encryption would be quite useless in this case unless you are worried that people sniffing on the network might laugh too loudly at the crap the untrusted site is exchanging with you ;) .


The content you are exchanging without encryption or strong authentication is still enough to put you in jail or on a watchlist in many countries.

Nearly ALL internet traffic should be encrypted. Period.

A man-in-the-middle attack is 10 times harder than sniffing, is easily detectable, and has legal implications which require a warrant for governments in most countries.

We've lost a lot of ground since 10 years ago when the FreeS/WAN project seriously aimed to get most routine internet traffic encrypted by now and PGP was slowly becoming an accepted mail protocol.

Reply Parent Score: 1