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

NeverSSL

neverssl.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 212 posts

Re: NeverSSL

#101

Post by derekp7 »

a3n wrote: post #100
lelandbatey wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Do you think hotels and restaurants can deliver reliable [[tap water]] without charging for it? > Is it reasonable to assume that companies that don't charge for [[tap water]] can afford the staff to make sure that users don't abuse it? Sorry to post the snarky response, but with internet access, as with all shared goods like access to water or noise in a semi-shared space such as a hotel, yes, I do expect they can…

I was thinking the same thing, with [[lights]].

More like mustard and ketchup and napkins, along with a functional (clean, stocked) washroom.

Internet WIFI should be treated as a condiment. A business that can't afford condiments probably shouldn't be in business.

Re: NeverSSL

#103

Post by knownunown »

bfred_it wrote: post #61
knownunown wrote: post #14

I just use connectivitycheck.gstatic.com/generate_204. The URL is a bit long, but I have it bookmarked.

0118 999 881 999 119 725 — 3

Well, this was my solution before this shorter way came along. A force of habit, really, since I noticed that it was Android's internal method of detecting captive portals. There's really no reason to use this over neverssl.com, other than the gstatic.com page returning an empty response (or redirecting you if you're actually behind a captive portal). Somewhat useful if you don't want to leave the new tab page.

Re: NeverSSL

#104

Post by Turing_Machine »

jzwinck wrote: post #87
droopybuns wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I wonder why this seems so intractable in some countries. In others, such as Indonesia or Vietnam or Taiwan, WiFi really is free in most establishments and nobody seems to have a problem with customers abusing it. Even a $10 hotel has WiFi. Versus say London where a $300 hotel charges $25 for WiFi. In many places nobody would ever expect to pay one cent for WiFi in a place where they are already a paying customer unl…

"Versus say London where a $300 hotel charges $25 for WiFi."

It's almost an inverse relationship, in my experience. The economy to medium-priced "business travel" hotels (the sort found near most U.S. airports) usually have free wifi, while the fancy "luxury" hotels often charge for it.

Re: NeverSSL

#105

Post by Turing_Machine »

OriginalPenguin wrote: post #92
smsm42 wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 plac…

It shouldn't be too expensive for a restaurant to do. Although a restaurant can get by without wifi, most modern restaurants have it for managing OpenTable, monitoring yelp reviews, ordering supplies online, etc. I guess the signal might get a bit worse the farther away you get from the wifi router, but in general, providing wifi to customers shouldn't cost any additional money.

"It shouldn't be too expensive for a restaurant to do."

Heck, most McDonalds restaurants have free wifi these days, and that's about as cheap as it comes.

Re: NeverSSL

#106

Post by colmmacc »

hannob wrote: post #20
bisby wrote: post #15

It's sad, because these are the kinds of things that confuse the hell out of "common folk" and explaining requires explaining HTTPS, HSTS, how captive WiFi portals work, and then ultimately, why there isn't a better solution... which maybe doesn't have a great answer. I feel like this "workaround" site is designed to draw attention to the problem at hand more than it is meant to be useful for the task at hand?

> why there isn't a better solution... There is a better solution: No captive portals.

My real plan with NeverSSL.com is to use the access logs to publish an up-to-date database of broken networks and what the rough popularity of each broken network is.

I'm hopeful that these kinds of public analytics could lead to solutions, or at least who to start talking to.

Re: NeverSSL

#108

Post by snug »

Turing_Machine wrote: post #104
jzwinck wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder why this seems so intractable in some countries. In others, such as Indonesia or Vietnam or Taiwan, WiFi really is free in most establishments and nobody seems to have a problem with customers abusing it. Even a $10 hotel has WiFi. Versus say London where a $300 hotel charges $25 for WiFi. In many places nobody would ever expect to pay one cent for WiFi in a place where they are already a paying customer unl…

"Versus say London where a $300 hotel charges $25 for WiFi." It's almost an inverse relationship, in my experience. The economy to medium-priced "business travel" hotels (the sort found near most U.S. airports) usually have free wifi, while the fancy "luxury" hotels often charge for it.

Because it's usually people that can afford it, or a business trip, where the company will pay for it.

Re: NeverSSL

#109

Post by BillyParadise »

omginternets wrote: post #86
Filligree wrote: post #45

Earlier 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.

Honestly? It's 2017. Just throttle bandwidth and give your internet away for free. There are some obvious cases in which this is unacceptable, but they are few and far between. The overwhelming majority of captive portals I see are just trying to get your contact info... so now you have two reasons why they should disappear.

Ah, first world problems. Where I am, data connections are out of reach for the vast majority of the population (yet somehow, they all seem to have smartphones - go figger).

Everyone goes to the mall, not to shop, it would seem, but to use the free wifi and bask in the comfort of free aircon.

Captive portals are here to stay in places around the world, and like it or not, they are a widely used solution that is not going away any time soon. I for one applaud the author of this website's attempts to shine light on the problem of authenticating to this network type.

Re: NeverSSL

#110

Post by gumby »

colmmacc wrote: post #106
hannob wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> why there isn't a better solution... There is a better solution: No captive portals.

My real plan with NeverSSL.com is to use the access logs to publish an up-to-date database of broken networks and what the rough popularity of each broken network is. I'm hopeful that these kinds of public analytics could lead to solutions, or at least who to start talking to.

Since this involves information capture, you should let people know on the page. Although admittedly the naive user, for whom this is intended, may be confused by that.

Good idea by the way!

Post reply on HN