Timeline for Why is PCG meta not available in HTTPS?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 13, 2017 at 19:12 | comment | added | Draco18s no longer trusts SE | @ThomasWeller I have no response. I am not a networking web admin engineer. I only pretended to be one at a job I no longer have. I linked the blog post because Nick is a smarter man than I am about those things and laid out the reasons why SO did it the way SO did it. | |
| Jun 13, 2017 at 19:03 | comment | added | Thomas Weller | @Draco18s: yes, that happens when you just try to do it all the automatic way. But it can be done better. | |
| Jun 13, 2017 at 18:17 | comment | added | Draco18s no longer trusts SE | How would YOU like to register and serve 400 separate certificates? nickcraver.com/blog/2017/05/22/https-on-stack-overflow/… | |
| Jun 13, 2017 at 15:21 | comment | added | Nick T | @ThomasWeller Let's Encrypt limits certificates to 20/week/"registered" (second-level) domain. But even for paid authorities, there has to be some sort of automated process to get a few hundred certs or whatever for companies with scores of subdomains (or simply domains). | |
| Jun 13, 2017 at 13:35 | vote | accept | Thomas Weller | ||
| Jun 13, 2017 at 6:40 | comment | added | user62131 | I'm pretty sure the problem wasn't the cost of the certificates (for a site like Stack Exchange), but rather the technical impact. IIRC the site does various crazy things with its certificates in order to ensure that it works in as many situations as possible. There's a blog post about it somewhere. | |
| Jun 13, 2017 at 5:58 | comment | added | Thomas Weller | Well, meanwhile Let's Encrypt provides certificates for free, so I don't understand why all that link-moving was required. | |
| Jun 12, 2017 at 21:46 | history | answered | user62131 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |