up vote 1 down vote favorite
share [g+] share [fb]

I want to have all my content from my blog distributed in a ssl encrypted connection (meaning, I want to go https)

What are the drawbacks with respect to an unencrypted, "regular" http connection?

link|improve this question
59% accept rate
1  
I have a certificate and I want to use it for something -- Are you sure it's a certificate you can use for web hosting? That's not something you get by accident... – Arjan Nov 5 '09 at 16:04
It was included in my web host upgraded package. I am using it to encrypt openid negotiation now, but I'd like to put everything under ssl. – Stefano Borini Nov 5 '09 at 16:07
4  
@Paul, why would that stop people. Even the browser in my very old mobile phone supports HTTPS. – Arjan Nov 5 '09 at 16:14
1  
I don't see people being stopped by amazon's ssl page.... – Stefano Borini Nov 5 '09 at 16:15
1  
@Paul: because, as I said, I am tired of hearing people saying that if you use encryption you are doing illegal stuff. I would actually encourage anyone else to do the same, but for now I'd settle with mine. – Stefano Borini Nov 6 '09 at 0:54
show 2 more comments
feedback

3 Answers

up vote 3 down vote
  • Slightly more server CPU usage (only relevant for big sites)
  • The first SSL handshake may take a second or two (further page loads can skip it)
  • One certificate per IP address (because they're exchanged before sending any data - so the Host HTTP header cannot be used.
    • SNI allows using multiple certificates per IP address, but not all HTTP servers and clients* support it yet. (For example, on Debian 5 with Apache2, you need to switch to mod_gnutls, or compile mod_ssl manually.)
  • If your certificate is self-signed, it can become really annoying for visitors.
  • Same if any of your images/stylesheets/scripts are loaded over plain HTTP.

(* wget and curl can't really be called "browsers")

link|improve this answer
1  
Although wget and curl may not be called "browsers", IE on WinXP usually does. – innaM Nov 5 '09 at 16:44
Regarding "slightly more". – grawity Oct 16 '11 at 13:38
feedback
up vote 2 down vote

The only two I can think of is it slightly slower and makes a higher load on the server.

link|improve this answer
feedback
up vote 2 down vote

It will depend what your blog actually does. For example, are you including images from other sites? Are https-URIs for those images available? If not, you will end up with browsers complaining about insecure content.

May I ask why you are considering https?

link|improve this answer
2  
because I have a certificate and I want to use it for something. Also, I am tired of hearing people saying that only banks and illegal stuff use encryption. – Stefano Borini Nov 5 '09 at 15:15
good point for the included stuff. hmmmm.... it can be annoying I guess. any opinion about this point ? – Stefano Borini Nov 5 '09 at 15:26
1  
IMHO it's a real show stopper. People don't want to be annoyed by stuff like that. Of course, you can always host this stuff on your site (I guess). – innaM Nov 5 '09 at 15:30
no, I embed images from the pedia... this is annoying. :( – Stefano Borini Nov 5 '09 at 15:33
So I have a certificate and don't know what to do with it ... so sad. – Stefano Borini Nov 5 '09 at 15:33
show 5 more comments
feedback

Your Answer

 
or
required, but never shown
discard

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.