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

121–130 of 212 posts

Re: NeverSSL

#121

Post by innocenat »

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.

There are still part of the world where you are require by law to log who is accessing the internet, in case he/she does something illegal.

Re: NeverSSL

#122

Post by arjie »

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.

I don't want your shitty slow internet. I want to pay $20 for fast enough Internet on a plane, not some 56.6kbps bullshit.

Re: NeverSSL

#124

Post by iandanforth »

shapath wrote: post #123

Can some ELI5 (explain like I'm 5) to me? I don't get this. Seems like something I should know about.

Some routers and networks try to intercept all requests and replace them with a 'captive portal' page for logging into that network. When you make a request to a webpage using https:// (i.e. SSL) the network has a much harder time injecting the login page, so you end up seeing nothing. The connection isn't going through and the network's login page can't break through SSL battle-warrior-armor.

Re: NeverSSL

#126

Post by pfranz »

gumby wrote: post #112
rmccue wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The captive portal browser (pop-up on macOS, slide-over on iOS) doesn't support full JavaScript or cookies (or previously didn't, maybe that has changed), so some captive portals specifically allow the captive portal test domains through. There's actually a huge list of domains that macOS/iOS try: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/18891706/ios7-and-captive...

> The captive portal browser (pop-up on macOS, slide-over on iOS) I have never seen a captive portal interceptor on MacOS (much to my disappointment), only iOS. Is there some setting I previously screwed up?

I've never seen a setting for it. It's just a modal dialog with a webview. Like iOS, you have "Cancel" as an option until it connects and changes to "Done."

Here's a screen shot I found: https://www.wireless.bris.ac.uk/gfx/eduroam-osx/captive_port...

Re: NeverSSL

#127

Post by Namidairo »

r1ch wrote: post #13

Not sure about Apple, but isn't this automatically handled by Android these days? Every time it connects to a network it pings http://google.com/generate_204 and if the response code isn't 204 then it should prompt you to open the browser to the redirected URL.

The current list is https://www.google.com/generate_204 http://connectivitycheck.gstatic.com/generate_204 http://www.google.com/gen_204

according to https://github.com/android/platform_frameworks_base/blob/5b2...

Re: NeverSSL

#128

Post by photon-torpedo »

gumby wrote: post #111
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 see it scaling the same way hannob's example does, with water. Who charges for a drink of water?

Most restaurants in Germany do. You'd have to explicitly and sometimes adamantly request "tap water" to get access to free water, otherwise you'll be served and charged for fancy "mineral water".

Re: NeverSSL

#129

Post by Buge »

gumby wrote: post #110
colmmacc wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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!

A link to a privacy policy at the bottom shouldn't confuse anyone.

Re: NeverSSL

#130

Post by zuck9 »

epimenov wrote: post #50
deathanatos wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is; both Router Advertisements and DHCP include options for captive portals[1]. In the case of DHCP for example, the DHCP server can send the URI of the portal, which the OS can display to the user. The mechanism in [1] is what OS X uses, I believe. [1]: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7710

I think OS X opens captive.apple.com

It does, and so does iOS when you connect to a WiFi network that has a portal.
Post reply on HN