21–30 of 36 posts
"We've seen cases outside the UK, with some of our World Service sites where foreign governments have tried to [track which articles and videos you're looking at or selectively suppress individual pieces of content]." Is there any more information about such instances or is that insider knowledge?
Haha, this sentence: « It has altered all of its addresses from beginning "HTTP" to "HTTPS", which is widely considered to be a more secure connection » Widely considered, I love it.
BBC News was my captive portal go-to site. Sad to lose the non-redirecting http version.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Widely considered, I love it. Didn't get this. Any technical issues/anecdote to make this more interesting?
Well, HTTP has zero security, and HTTPS has this big complicated security mechanism (TLS) that tries to ensure no one can snoop on your connection, alter the content, or pretend to be a server they aren't. There's no subjectivity at stake, here: One is designed without security, the other is designed with security. It's like saying the Atacama Desert is widely considered to be drier than a thunderstorm.
BBC News was my captive portal go-to site. Sad to lose the non-redirecting http version.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Widely considered, I love it. Didn't get this. Any technical issues/anecdote to make this more interesting?
Well, HTTP has zero security, and HTTPS has this big complicated security mechanism (TLS) that tries to ensure no one can snoop on your connection, alter the content, or pretend to be a server they aren't. There's no subjectivity at stake, here: One is designed without security, the other is designed with security. It's like saying the Atacama Desert is widely considered to be drier than a thunderstorm.
But if you think about that, the statement is about as good as it can be.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Widely considered, I love it. Didn't get this. Any technical issues/anecdote to make this more interesting?
Well, HTTP has zero security, and HTTPS has this big complicated security mechanism (TLS) that tries to ensure no one can snoop on your connection, alter the content, or pretend to be a server they aren't. There's no subjectivity at stake, here: One is designed without security, the other is designed with security. It's like saying the Atacama Desert is widely considered to be drier than a thunderstorm.
Interestingly, the screencap that's the hero image for TFA includes a comparison between a picture of Xi and Obama and a picture of Winnie the Pooh and Tigger. The Xi => Pooh comparison is (to my understanding) a common one in China, and one the Party tries to suppress.
I find it amazing how very powerful people can end up with such delicate egos. Here in the West we mock leaders all the time and it rarely undermines their authority.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, HTTP has zero security, and HTTPS has this big complicated security mechanism (TLS) that tries to ensure no one can snoop on your connection, alter the content, or pretend to be a server they aren't. There's no subjectivity at stake, here: One is designed without security, the other is designed with security. It's like saying the Atacama Desert is widely considered to be drier than a thunderstorm.
but https against the great firewall (and its connection with state run dns/cert roots) is nothing but a nuisance.