Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by accidentaldev 2413 days ago
funny how this site is not https
1 comments

Other than the increased CO2 footprint what would - in this particular case - be the benefit?
The standard HTTPS benefit of making it impossible for ISPs to inject into and/or modify the page, usually for stupid reasons.
That's the big thing that pushed me to add LetsEncrypt to my blog. I was on some Belgium sim card and the ISP injected some crap via JavaScript at the top of my website. I couldn't even read it; didn't properly detect language/locale, but it looked like some warning about being near my data limit.
That you actually get what the website sent you.
Genuinely curious, by what proportion does it increase CO2 footprint by? Tried searching online but couldn't find anything.
TLS takes considerably more watts of power on the basis it actually does more work and shuffles more electrons around the CPU. I suppose that loosely converts into carbon footprint.

However even if it is an issue, most sites sending 6 meg of JavaScript crap down that gets recompiled on every visitor’s machine, autoplaying videos and advertising would be doing more damage. So if anyone is going to complain they should probably start there...

A proxy can't cache the ressources anymore. SSL overhead, CPU used by both parties to do the encryption. But the ISP can't alter the page.
Increased carbon emissions is interesting side effect of https
We should ask our governments to ban the use of https and just trust each other

(</ironic>, just in case some internet random folk thinks I’m serious)