[brewmarche]

Without HTTPS someone could alter the content, spread false information, inject ads, malware, and other stuff, redirect to some other site, …

(This is a general remark, but it goes for a blog post like this as well.)

[himata4113]

It's still a weak argument since it's extremely rare in practice that's why I suggested blaming the ISP instead since ISP's are the ones that have historically tampered with http content.

[Orygin]

It's rare in practice because everyone and their mothers run HTTPS now.

[foobiekr]

Attacks in general are all rare in practice in the grand scheme of the internet. So?

[himata4113]

Yes, that's why you present a better argument, that's the entire conversation.

[reaperducer]

Not everyone has to prepare their home for a leopard attack.

[Joker_vD]

The site owners could do all of that even with HTTPS, and no-one would revoke their certs. Just saying.

And the best Windows malware is actually digitally signed.