[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANWtx03S1SEWEXthjO38JQvVQurChfcNDR7uCWsam1axsrxMZw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2013 20:11:19 -0400
From: Rich Rumble <richrumble@...il.com>
To: john-users@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: OT: HTTPS for openwall.info?
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 6:37 PM, Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 11:15:48AM +1300, Pedro Worcel wrote:
> > The main reason I like it is because I am behind a restrictive firewall
> (at
> > work), so while I don't understand how bad it is for a person in a
> country
> > with a great firewall, I know it is a major pain in the ass for censors
> if
> > websites use https only. (e.g. with github/china ordeal)
>
I use several proxies and filtering products, a lot of filtering done at
the domain level, not the protocol. The greatfirewall of china uses this
method and many others, most filters I've encountered can use DNS and or
protocols. Port 443 hardly get's a pass just because it's 443 in my
experience with repressive regimes.
> Well, that sort of reasoning applies to all websites, not just the wiki.
> We'd need HTTPS for the main Openwall website as well, then. Yes, this
> makes sense.
>
It doesn't from a censorship perspective, if you ask me. None of this is to
say I don't support the use of HTTPS for any website, esp openwall, I'd
love to see HTTPS.
-rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
