Ah something for the day xkcd[1] makes https mandatory. 1. http://xkcd.com
I use yahoo. I don't want to use a site that I would otherwise intentionally use-- captive portals often poison the DNS.
NeverSSL
71–80 of 212 posts
Re: NeverSSL
#72Earlier quoted context omitted.
What would you suggest for the case of someone wanting payment for the connection? Like it or not, a lot of places do that.
What would you suggest if someone wants payment for a water tab? Ever seen that? I think we should move towards considering Internet access as a general service that people make available for their guests/customers.
How do you see this scaling?
Do you think hotels and restaurants can deliver reliable internet without charging for it?
Is it reasonable to assume that companies that don't charge for wifi can afford the staff to make sure that users don't abuse it?
I am considering your proposal & I don't see it working at all.
Re: NeverSSL
#73Thank you for doing this. For years the NYT has been my unencrypted go-to; having something like this is great.
Re: NeverSSL
#74Re: NeverSSL
#75I hope this site can reword their explanation. It's a bit confusing what their intent is, especially in the final paragraph.
Re: NeverSSL
#76Leaving this feedback here because there's no contact info on the page: for the purpose of accessing captive portals, it would be a good idea to disable page caching. Since this was posted I've had to use it twice and the second time I had to hard refresh to see the portal.
Re: NeverSSL
#77Earlier quoted context omitted.
What would you suggest if someone wants payment for a water tab? Ever seen that? I think we should move towards considering Internet access as a general service that people make available for their guests/customers.
How do you see this scaling? Do you think hotels and restaurants can deliver reliable internet without charging for it? Is it reasonable to assume that companies that don't charge for wifi can afford the staff to make sure that users don't abuse it? I am considering your proposal & I don't see it working at all.
> Do you think hotels and restaurants can deliver reliable internet without charging for it?
Many do. I've never seen a restaurant charging for Wifi, and I've seen plenty offering it for free. Quality varies, some are good, some suck. Hotels are all over them map, but I just stayed at the hotel that advertises free high quality Wifi (and it indeed was fine) as one of the amenities.
US-centric, of course, in some places I guess it many be too expensive for restaurants to do this.
Re: NeverSSL
#78Leaving this feedback here because there's no contact info on the page: for the purpose of accessing captive portals, it would be a good idea to disable page caching. Since this was posted I've had to use it twice and the second time I had to hard refresh to see the portal.
Will do, thanks! Feel free to send me any specifics colm AT allcosts.net.
Update: I've added Cache-Control and Expire HTTP headers to the HTTP responses for neverssl.com
Re: NeverSSL
#79Earlier quoted context omitted.
This isn't generally a problem on smartphones and tablets because they can usually detect captive portals and prompt the user appropriately.
Do you travel? I often have problems and am running out of non-https sites to test against. Best I can figure is that they're whitelisting certain domains so the captive portal detection isn't triggered. I think this is so certain things like iMessage or email work (hence, whitelisting apple.com), but blocking out the rest of the web. I don't travel often (Christmas and maybe once or twice a year outside of that), bu…
Apple uses a large amount of domains to avoid this problem.
Re: NeverSSL
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
What would you suggest if someone wants payment for a water tab? Ever seen that? I think we should move towards considering Internet access as a general service that people make available for their guests/customers.
How do you see this scaling? Do you think hotels and restaurants can deliver reliable internet without charging for it? Is it reasonable to assume that companies that don't charge for wifi can afford the staff to make sure that users don't abuse it? I am considering your proposal & I don't see it working at all.
Cost of internet can priced into the prices for goods and services provided