Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

HTTPS on NYTimes.com

open.blogs.nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 167 posts

Re: HTTPS on NYTimes.com

#41

Post by caconym_ »

The thing the NYT needs to fix (as of earlier last year) is the fact that you can't cancel your subscription without calling them (which is not the case for signing up). I spent 20 minutes[1] on the phone telling them that yes, I really did want to cancel. It was a worse experience than dealing with Comcast, not least because I felt bad for the poor woman who obviously had some financial incentive to get me to stay on with them.

[1] This number is approximate. Could have been less, could have been more; it was a while ago.

edit: I feel kinda bad now that this is the top comment in a thread about something positive the NYT did; if anyone tells me that they've since added online unsubscribe, I will change this comment accordingly.

Re: HTTPS on NYTimes.com

#43

Post by Ajedi32 »

mtkd wrote: post #28

They mention it has been a complex undertaking and not complete yet - does anyone know why they can't just sit a traffic manager in front of everything with SSL offloading? Also does anyone know what the new personalisation features are that they mention being able to offer now HTTPS in place?

> Also does anyone know what the new personalisation features are that they mention being able to offer now HTTPS in place?

Not sure what features the NYT is referencing specifically, but Chrome has certain features [like the Geolocation API][1] disabled for pages loaded over HTTP. See [Deprecating Powerful Features on Insecure Origins][2].

[1]: https://developers.google.com/web/updates/2016/04/geolocatio...

[2]: https://www.chromium.org/Home/chromium-security/deprecating-...

Re: HTTPS on NYTimes.com

#44

Post by mtgx »

toomanybeersies wrote: post #16

It's nice to see more news media moving towards using HTTPS. NYTimes now joins a small club, alongside the Guardian and the Washington Post. Here's a dev blog post on the WaPo moving to https: https://developer.washingtonpost.com/pb/blog/post/2015/12/10... And one on the Guardian moving to https: https://www.theguardian.com/info/developer-blog/2016/nov/29/...

A few more here:

https://securethe.news/sites/

Re: HTTPS on NYTimes.com

#47

Post by shakna »

CPLX wrote: post #14
fanpuns wrote: post #2

Oh no, this was my go-to site whenever I had to login to public wifi and https wouldn't redirect :(

I've been using 1.1.1.1 for years. It's easy to type and seems to call up interstitial screens fast , especially the NYC subway wifi portal, where seconds count. Of course this thread makes me wonder if I've been doing it wrong.

1.1.1.1 is assigned to APNIC Labs in Australia. It isn't always reachable for their own reasons.

Using 1.1.1.1 makes a http request, which lets the captive portal take over, so good job, but you are actually hitting a group that actually exists, and what if they suddenly launch a HTST site on that IP? It might break your method.

Re: HTTPS on NYTimes.com

#48

Post by yvan »

mtkd wrote: post #28

They mention it has been a complex undertaking and not complete yet - does anyone know why they can't just sit a traffic manager in front of everything with SSL offloading? Also does anyone know what the new personalisation features are that they mention being able to offer now HTTPS in place?

For our media website, it took us one year before we could move to HTTPS, mainly because of the AdServers which wasn't ready. We had to talk to each ad provider in order to ask them to upgrade to HTTPS. Unfortunately as media companies have most of their revenue from ads you just can't switch like that.

Also, features that are now available once the HTTPS by default on a website, is the AMP, Notifications, HTTP2 (faster loading) and, of course, the little advantage that Google gives to the HTTPS websites.

Re: HTTPS on NYTimes.com

#49

Post by CountSessine »

caconym_ wrote: post #41

The thing the NYT needs to fix (as of earlier last year) is the fact that you can't cancel your subscription without calling them (which is not the case for signing up). I spent 20 minutes[1] on the phone telling them that yes, I really did want to cancel. It was a worse experience than dealing with Comcast, not least because I felt bad for the poor woman who obviously had some financial incentive to get me to stay o…

Very interesting. That's good to know - thank you.

I was going to get a subscription for the first time starting in February. I'll have to reconsider that.

Re: HTTPS on NYTimes.com

#50

Post by caconym_ »

CountSessine wrote: post #49
caconym_ wrote: post #41

The thing the NYT needs to fix (as of earlier last year) is the fact that you can't cancel your subscription without calling them (which is not the case for signing up). I spent 20 minutes[1] on the phone telling them that yes, I really did want to cancel. It was a worse experience than dealing with Comcast, not least because I felt bad for the poor woman who obviously had some financial incentive to get me to stay o…

Very interesting. That's good to know - thank you. I was going to get a subscription for the first time starting in February. I'll have to reconsider that.

It left a bad taste in my mouth, for sure. Like I said, that was earlier last[1] year; I make no guarantee that it has not changed for the better.

[1] Actually I said "earlier this year", which is incorrect as of Jan 1.

Post reply on HN