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

BBC websites blocked in China after security change

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–36 of 36 posts

Re: BBC websites blocked in China after security change

#31

Post by vfulco2 »

A2017U1 wrote: post #29
Arubis wrote: post #19

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.

The latest Winnie The Pooh movie (containing nothing offensive, suitable for children) has of course been banned in China. 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.

This + inifinity

Re: BBC websites blocked in China after security change

#33

Post by taejo »

justicezyx wrote: post #27
phyzome wrote: post #16

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.

I am not sure if you considered the intended audience of the article at all. But if you think about that, the statement is about as good as it can be.

No: HTTPS is more secure than HTTP. This is true regardless of the intended audience.

Explaining why may be beyond a particular audience, but that doesn't justify weakening the truth with weasel words.

Re: BBC websites blocked in China after security change

#34

Post by phyzome »

justicezyx wrote: post #27
phyzome wrote: post #16

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.

I am not sure if you considered the intended audience of the article at all. But if you think about that, the statement is about as good as it can be.

The journalist could have simply put "is more secure"—this is objectively true!—but then they got nervous, perhaps because they didn't understand the subject well enough, and decided to fall back to hedge phrases.

The statement is not as good as it can be, because it introduces uncertainty where in reality there is none.

Re: BBC websites blocked in China after security change

#35

Post by phyzome »

gcb0 wrote: post #28
phyzome wrote: post #16

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.

It's more than a nuisance to them because they have not yet gotten everyone to use their DNS roots. That's why they're blocking the BBC!

Re: BBC websites blocked in China after security change

#36

Post by chw9e »

AFAIK there’s not problem with https in China - today most companies use https for their websites and app servers, see Baidu, Taobao, JD, etc. Maybe BBC didn’t register things correctly with the govt or the govt is just specifically targeting them. But the article’s title is a little misleading by implying that https leads to GFW blocking.
Post reply on HN