RSS
Senator Schumer Says Websites Should Default To HTTPS
from the security dept
There are plenty of websites where it absolutely makes sense for the default to be https, rather than http as the protocol (if you don't know -- and you should -- https encrypts the traffic, while http does not). Most banks and such already use https, but plenty of sites that don't involve financial institutions do not. Even sites like Google's Gmail only recently switched over to defaulting to https. Still, it's a bit of a surprise to see Senator Chuck Schumer announcing that major websites should switch to https, and it makes me wonder if he's preparing legislation on that. I'm not so sure that we want a law mandating https.
Separately, he seems to indicate that the lack of encryption with http is a "security flaw" that only really got attention in 2007. That's not quite true. I mean it's been well known that http isn't encrypted for much, much longer than that. And it's not so much a "flaw" as the basic way that http was designed. And, of course, whether or not websites use https, you can protect yourself with VPN encryption software or services, but it doesn't seem like Schumer wants to mandate that...
Separately, he seems to indicate that the lack of encryption with http is a "security flaw" that only really got attention in 2007. That's not quite true. I mean it's been well known that http isn't encrypted for much, much longer than that. And it's not so much a "flaw" as the basic way that http was designed. And, of course, whether or not websites use https, you can protect yourself with VPN encryption software or services, but it doesn't seem like Schumer wants to mandate that...
I’m looking for research...
Geography Of The App Economy
Innovate More. Code Less: Optimizing Open-Source Utilization
I’m looking for policy...
Developers On Patents: Ron Garret of Awun
Developers On Patents: Five Employees, Six Lawyers
I have an app...
Developer Census: Be Counted. It takes less than two minutes.
Online Video & The Media Industry
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
HTTPS also costs more to implement.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Exactly. IIRC, the rule of thumb was that a web site could handle 100 HTTP requests for every 10 HTTPS requests.
Is the good senator going to pay for all of the infrastructure upgrades he's mandating?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Of course it would seem good at first, for the protection of the public; but one of the clauses will likely happen to be that self-signed certificates are nixed.
And I ask how many web sites out there now don't use HTTPS or use insecure HTTPS because they can't afford a cert. :/
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Why can't websites have their own "self signed" keys and have a search engine, like Google, search various websites for the keys and store them. When I want to connect to a website via a wireless connection, my laptop (which can securely connect to Google) verifies the website's authenticity with Google and, maybe, Yahoo to ensure that the keys that Google/Yahoo give me match with each other and that they match with the keys of the website that I am connecting to. Then, Google connects to the site and verifies the keys for me.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Oh, look. We've just re-invented the Certificate Authority.
The solution is to update HTTPS to have "Private HTTP", which still uses Diffie-Hellman for key exchange and privacy, but doesn't attempt to verify authenticity to prevent against a man-in-the-middle attack. This would protect all sessions from passive snooping (I'm looking at you, NSA; I'm looking at you, FireSheep) while not needing a central CA.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
That's what I said. I know Google's/yahoo's public keys ahead of time because it's pre-built into my browser that I downloaded ahead of time (from a secure channel, presumably).
I go on open wifi.
I go on site with Https
I check the key.
I securely connect to Google and ask it what the key is
Google goes to site
Google checks key
google securely tells me what the key is
I see if what I'm getting from the site matches what Google is telling me.
(the software does this automatically of course, transparent to the user).
If they don't match, my browser alerts me with popups.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Already present
In fact, as long as you have some other means to verify the certificate like a finger print distributed via signed email or a physical name card, you are relatively safe against the man in the middle attack.
Further, most browsers will provide options to accept the certificate permanently. If you do that, you'll only need to do the verification/authentication manually only the first time and it should be smooth going the next time while providing about as much protection as using a CA. (no cert revoking but you can remove the particular cert from your trusted list if you know to no longer trust it)
Hmm... Perhaps a social networking/crowd-source web of trust... hee hee
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
https://schumer.senate.gov/
"schumer.senate.gov uses an invalid security certificate."
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: https://schumer.senate.gov/
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
I think a better way is informing the public and making then shun websites that don't use encryption end to end on everything.
Heck HTTP is prone to:
- Ad insertion by anyone along the way.
- Snooping by anyone(i.e. law enforcement, the government, ad agencies, criminals, your neighbor)
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
It should NEVER be a surprise to see Schumer standing in front of a camera.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Why not just educate people?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Don't know if this is related...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Don't know if this is related...
I read both of these sites so much they start to blur together. Of course that story was run here on Techdirt. :(
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Yet another...
If he has a problem with HTTP, then he should take it up with the Creator directly - I'm sure Al Gore will explain why he created the internet with HTTP instead of just HTTPS...
/sarcasm off
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
While you're right that encryption was left out of HTTP by design (for the caching benefits) it was relatively recently (even later than 2007) that it become obvious that HTTPS was more than just a best practice for any web application where users log in.
Before tools like firesheep [1] came on the scene it was generally assumed that simply encrypting the login exchange was sufficient. I'm pretty sure I remember you mentioning firesheep in a story so you ought to be aware of this but it sounds like you may have missed the wider implications.
RE: vpn, as pointed out by the first Coward, your statement is not quite true. It _will_ however help you in a proximity-based attack (e.g. coffee shop wifi + firesheep).
[1] http://codebutler.com/firesheep
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
If he actually proposes the law and it builds traction he will probably be shot from a book depository.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
https
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
https
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Add Your Comment