84
Chromium Blog: Towards HTTPS by default (blog.chromium.org)
submitted 3 years ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
32 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/3301227

Chrome will be experimenting with defaulting to https:// if the site supports it, even when an http:// link is used and will warn about downloads from insecure sources for "high-risk files" (example given is an exe). They're also planning on enabling it by default for Incognito Mode and "sites that Chrome knows you typically access over HTTPS".

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [S] 20 points 3 years ago (1 child)

It does if you just type in something like wikipedia.org . This most recent change they're working on is so that a link on a page to:

http://wikipedia.org will get redirected to https://wikipedia.org if the site supports it.

This will fix a bunch of old links that are still floating around on various sites, forums, etc and keep people on https, instead of doing the https -> http -> https redirect bouncing around that can happen now.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    Ah, that’s a great feature. Hope this comes to Brave soon.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    I disagree. While in practice, this is often the same website, it is a different protocol and a different port. It just happens to use the same DNS address. You're explicitly giving your browser a FQDN, and it is ignoring it and doing something else.

    I hope this feature can be disabled. Google has been ignoring the W3C and has shipped proprietary, insecure features in their chromium engine for a while now, so it wouldn't surprise me if they made it permanent 🤷

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    What kind of monster would deliberately serve different content for http and https versions of the same URL?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    I agree. That would be absurd.

    However, I don't like not having the option of using HTTP if I want to use it. It's okay if the webserver redirects me, but I don't like if my browser does it when I didn't tell it to. I might want this when doing development, port tunneling, VPN stuff, etc. In most cases, it won't matter, but when it does, it will be a pain in the ass.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    Imagine you want to test your redirect from 80 to 443 when setting up your webserver.

    While I think for the normal user this enhances security by defaulting to HTTPS, however this makes no sense for a browser. This should be enforced server side, the browser is for browsing, i.e. viewing. Not controlling and competing with the server software for competency.

    Chromium is really leaning into bad code practice with the disregard for "separation of concerns".

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •