Live data from Hacker News

The Bureau of Meteorology website does not support connections via HTTPS

bom.gov.au

21–30 of 58 posts

Re: The Bureau of Meteorology website does not support connections via HTTPS

#21

What practical difference does it make if I connect to an Australian weather forecast site via HTTP or HTTPS? Is the NZ secret police gonna MITM a rain forecast my way when it's actually gonna be a very sunny day?

Nah, the NZ secret police is too busy removing NZ from maps so no one can find us.

I feel like all police in NZ are secret police because I never see any out in the street anymore.

Re: The Bureau of Meteorology website does not support connections via HTTPS

#23

Controverse opinion: Why do I need https when looking for the weather forcast. Https is blindly thrown on everything. If the data is public and no login or personal/sensitive data is involved why do I need https?

What happens when a site you really do need and have HTTPS on (your bank, say) has a cross-site request forgery vulnerability, and someone plops an exploit script on that non-HTTPS site you visit? With crafty enough hackers, your savings just got wired to a foreign country.

The entire internet needs to be HTTPS to protect against stupid security decisions made long ago that we can’t undo now in the name of backwards compatibility.

Re: The Bureau of Meteorology website does not support connections via HTTPS

#24

Controverse opinion: Why do I need https when looking for the weather forcast. Https is blindly thrown on everything. If the data is public and no login or personal/sensitive data is involved why do I need https?

Your LE friendly ISP can insert a JS browser exploit and gain access to your device. Is that a valid reason?

Re: The Bureau of Meteorology website does not support connections via HTTPS

#25
HTTPS is still a pain in the ass, even in 2024.

If letsencrypt would offer wildcard certificates with their url based authentification as they offer for non-wildcard certificates, it would be ok.

But having to tinker with the DNS infrastructure for each project which wants to use domain wide HTTPS is so much hassle.

Re: The Bureau of Meteorology website does not support connections via HTTPS

#26
post #2

Welcome to Australia. This has been an issue for years, and I don't know why.

NZ feels behind Australia in most ways. But in this area we're ahead. It's slightly insane to me a country as wealthy as yours still has this sort of thing going on.

Re: The Bureau of Meteorology website does not support connections via HTTPS

#28

Controverse opinion: Why do I need https when looking for the weather forcast. Https is blindly thrown on everything. If the data is public and no login or personal/sensitive data is involved why do I need https?

What happens when a site you really do need and have HTTPS on (your bank, say) has a cross-site request forgery vulnerability, and someone plops an exploit script on that non-HTTPS site you visit? With crafty enough hackers, your savings just got wired to a foreign country. The entire internet needs to be HTTPS to protect against stupid security decisions made long ago that we can’t undo now in the name of backwards…

> The entire internet needs to be HTTPS to protect against stupid security decisions made long ago that we can’t undo now in the name of backwards compatibility.

We can undo it now, the powers that b just refuse to abandon the altar of backwards compatibility, damn the cost. (Even though the addition of a straightforward document browser with no JS and no dynamic content would seriously improve most of the internet....)

Re: The Bureau of Meteorology website does not support connections via HTTPS

#29

I find intriguing their explanation about how to use their FTP service and why it’s not possible to access it with a modern browser. http://www.bom.gov.au/catalogue/anon-ftp-hints.shtml

They make an (easily made) mistake on that page: the encrypted version of FTP is not SFTP, but FTPS. SFTP is an entirely different protocol based on SSH.
Post reply on HN