| |||
Views: 88,584,285 |
Main | FAQ | Uploader | IRC chat | Radio | Memberlist | Active users | Latest posts | Calendar | Stats | Online users | Search | 05-14-24 12:28 PM |
|
Guest: Register | Login |
0 users currently in Help/Suggestions/Bug Reports | 1 guest |
Main - Help/Suggestions/Bug Reports - The SSL mode | New thread | New reply |
Do you use it regularly? | |
Yes | |
No | |
I use it from times to times | |
Multiple voting is not allowed. Changing your vote is allowed. 13 users have voted so far. |
Mega-Mario |
| ||
Spamming from alt accounts. Level: 81 Posts: 1041/1610 EXP: 4887840 Next: 105009 Since: 09-10-08 Last post: 3607 days Last view: 3027 days |
I don't use it.
I must say, while it is nice having a secure board after the Swiss cheese Acmlm's board was, this may be an unneeded measure: 1. when people link externally with HTTPS links, other people get security warnings due to the custom certificate 2. it's not like Board2 is Paypal or some other website that transfers sensitive data 3. if there are security holes in the board, a SSL certificate is not going to fix those Just giving my opinion, and being curious about others' opinions, and mostly curious about why that was implemented at all. ____________________ Kafuka -- ROM hacking Kuribo64 -- we hack shit |
Cellar Dweller |
| ||
Snifit Level: 39 Posts: 284/287 EXP: 385741 Next: 19030 Since: 02-19-07 From: Arkansas Last post: 4070 days Last view: 3237 days |
IIRC, it was added for the benefit of users that are subjected to network based content filtering.
What I don't get is why the staff prefer the encryption when they are not subject to such filtering. They put https URLs in the PoRA box when relative links would be better. KP9000 even posted a picture on Jul with a https URL and drew a complaint from Xkeeper. I don't think that the use of SSL was ever intended to protect against any vulnerability in the board code. |
chungy |
| ||
Rex Level: 51 Posts: 455/533 EXP: 961743 Next: 52195 Since: 08-23-07 From: Las Vegas Last post: 4462 days Last view: 4264 days |
the self-signed cert and nonstandard ports are fairly odd, the first one being a major issue tbh. |
NightKev |
| ||
Cape Luigi Level: 131 Posts: 4246/4792 EXP: 26267896 Next: 156724 Since: 03-15-07 Last post: 3752 days Last view: 3664 days |
I thought 81 was the standard https port? ____________________ |
paulguy |
| ||||||||||
Flurry Level: 37 Posts: 245/258 EXP: 327453 Next: 10800 Since: 04-10-07 From: Buffalo, NY Last post: 5046 days Last view: 4586 days |
|
blackhole89 |
| ||
The Guardian Moloch whose eyes are a thousand blind windows! Level: 124 Posts: 3147/4196 EXP: 21563909 Next: 272692 Since: 02-19-07 From: Ithaca, NY, US Last post: 489 days Last view: 102 days |
|
Mega-Mario |
| ||
Spamming from alt accounts. Level: 81 Posts: 1042/1610 EXP: 4887840 Next: 105009 Since: 09-10-08 Last post: 3607 days Last view: 3027 days |
Posted by blackhole89 Then how come the PORA box still has a HTTPS link in HTTP mode? or does it only filter links in posts? ____________________ Kafuka -- ROM hacking Kuribo64 -- we hack shit |
blackhole89 |
| ||
The Guardian Moloch whose eyes are a thousand blind windows! Level: 124 Posts: 3148/4196 EXP: 21563909 Next: 272692 Since: 02-19-07 From: Ithaca, NY, US Last post: 489 days Last view: 102 days |
|
chungy |
| ||
Rex Level: 51 Posts: 457/533 EXP: 961743 Next: 52195 Since: 08-23-07 From: Las Vegas Last post: 4462 days Last view: 4264 days |
Posted by blackhole89 Does it matter? it's still *some* verification which is better than *none*. Sure it's not supported by a whole lot of people (majority of Windows browsers don't have the cert, and it certainly doesn't come with Windows), but still clicking past an unverifiable certificate would be the same situation for those users as it is now. if they cared about verifying it against someone, they can. |
Ailure |
| ||
Hats Steam Board2 group Level: 121 Posts: 3567/3965 EXP: 19807559 Next: 249137 Since: 02-19-07 From: Sweden, Skåne Last post: 3319 days Last view: 2070 days |
I'm all for fixing the port thing at least, three less characters in the URL's and all that.
Even if not for CAcert, what would be the most affordable certificate authority? ____________________ AIM: gamefreak1337, MSN: Emil_sim@spray.se, XMPP: ailure@xmpp.kafuka.org
|
Main - Help/Suggestions/Bug Reports - The SSL mode | New thread | New reply |
© 2005-2023 Acmlm, blackhole89, Xkeeper et al. |
MySQL - queries: 59, rows: 79/80, time: 0.059 seconds. |