Gathering session cookies with Firesheep
Gathering session cookies with Firesheep
Posted Nov 4, 2010 16:33 UTC (Thu) by quotemstr (subscriber, #45331)In reply to: Gathering session cookies with Firesheep by robert_s
Parent article: Gathering session cookies with Firesheep
How about not being able to use virtualhosts with HTTPS? A huge number (the vast majority I would say) of sites on the web use virtualhosts. I wonder how quickly IPv4 would be exhausted if we all started using HTTPS and needed individual IPs for our websites.Server Name Indication.
On top of that, once we start using HTTPS, most of our lovely tiered caching mechanisms become unusable. All requests will have to be served fully.
Clients cache requests served over SSL just fine. Gateway machines can translate SSL traffic into something before sending it to a reverse proxy or load-balancing it. CDNs also support SSL these days.
You are jumping through intellectual hoops to justify your hostility toward SSL. A modicum of research would have uncovered these solutions. Continuing to risk user privacy merely to save a few CPU cycles is just unacceptable. Network hardware never gets tired. CPU cycles are cheap. Real people have actual sensitive information crucial to their physical and emotional well-being. I can't believe people prefer the former to the latter.
Posted Nov 4, 2010 19:12 UTC (Thu)
by dlang (guest, #313)
[Link] (8 responses)
the problem is that the browsers don't all support this, so unless you are willing to reject everyone with a bad browser, this doesn't matter.
Posted Nov 4, 2010 19:14 UTC (Thu)
by quotemstr (subscriber, #45331)
[Link] (7 responses)
Posted Nov 4, 2010 19:22 UTC (Thu)
by dlang (guest, #313)
[Link] (5 responses)
Posted Nov 4, 2010 19:26 UTC (Thu)
by quotemstr (subscriber, #45331)
[Link] (4 responses)
Posted Nov 4, 2010 19:27 UTC (Thu)
by dlang (guest, #313)
[Link] (3 responses)
Posted Nov 4, 2010 19:30 UTC (Thu)
by quotemstr (subscriber, #45331)
[Link] (2 responses)
Are you really arguing that supporting a handful of users with ancient browsers is worth sacrificing everyone's privacy?
Posted Nov 4, 2010 23:50 UTC (Thu)
by nteon (subscriber, #53899)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Nov 9, 2010 14:36 UTC (Tue)
by holstein (guest, #6122)
[Link]
And Linux runs ususally very well on these ancient machines ;)
Posted Nov 5, 2010 9:03 UTC (Fri)
by ekj (guest, #1524)
[Link]
A solution which is unavailable on ~25% of all webservers, and which fail to work for ~10% of all users, is not currently viable.
It seems likely this problem will go away in the future. But at the moment, it's a real problem. 5 years from now, I expect SNI will be pretty universally supported. It'll allow shared-ip-webhosts to offer https afterall, and that's a pretty major progress.
Gathering session cookies with Firesheep
Gathering session cookies with Firesheep
Gathering session cookies with Firesheep
Gathering session cookies with Firesheep
Gathering session cookies with Firesheep
Gathering session cookies with Firesheep
Gathering session cookies with Firesheep
Gathering session cookies with Firesheep
Gathering session cookies with Firesheep