1 |
On Mon, 7 Mar 2011 15:48:19 +0100 |
2 |
Tobias Klausmann <klausman@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> On Mon, 07 Mar 2011, Mike Frysinger wrote: |
5 |
> > >> If *anybody* can't use SSL for any reason please yell so that we |
6 |
> > >> can decide if we leave it as it is (plain + encrypted) or not. |
7 |
> > > |
8 |
> > > Is there any *real* reason to force SSL? It is *hell* slow. |
9 |
> > |
10 |
> > it should of course be force for logging in |
11 |
> |
12 |
> If it is enforced for login, it should be enforced for logged |
13 |
> in sessions, cf. Cookie stealing (for a POC: Firesheep). And no, |
14 |
> restricting the login cookie to an IP is *not* "safe enough". |
15 |
|
16 |
Why does everyone assume it needs to be enforced? If user is interested |
17 |
in protecting his/her data, he/she can simply use https://. If he/she |
18 |
is not, there is no real reason to enforce slower (and not always |
19 |
supported) SSL. |
20 |
|
21 |
It's like forcing everyone to have doors with semi-automatic locks. |
22 |
|
23 |
-- |
24 |
Best regards, |
25 |
Michał Górny |