Recommended Answers
Jump to PostPretty cool tbh, web pages really need to be more secure and shouldnt communicate in plain text(sending passwords/usernames)
Jump to PostI think this definitely makes sense from both the point of view of quality of results and moving the web towards more security. Most "serious" websites out there are already secure using https, so, it is definitely, in part, a valid indicator of quality for a website. And, of course, …
Jump to PostWell put Dani, I hadn't even thought about the disadvantage of losing referral information. This will definitely be interesting to watch!
All 9 Replies
Pretty cool tbh, web pages really need to be more secure and shouldnt communicate in plain text(sending passwords/usernames)
I think this definitely makes sense from both the point of view of quality of results and moving the web towards more security. Most "serious" websites out there are already secure using https, so, it is definitely, in part, a valid indicator of quality for a website. And, of course, all sites should be using secure communications because a huge number of cyber-attacks or other malpractice on the internet is based on sniffing the plain-text traffic around the web. Plain-text traffic should not be the norm.
Yup, this was announced two days ago. Personally I think it's stupid. It seems as if Google wants entire websites to use SSL.
I don't see the point in adding overhead and losing all referrer information just so that every random dude who browses one page off of a Google search can be served a secure page.
We use SSL on the registration and login page, the edit profile page, and every other page where the user is potentially entering sensitive data. We also use SSL on the DaniPad homepage because DaniPad is a subscription-based service and so I want the first impression of it to be that we are secure.
But, yeah, I think that linking from site to site is the foundation of the world wide web, and it's important for website owners to be able to capture referrer information, for blogs to capture trackback information, etc.
Yes, referrer information isn't lost on HTTPS<->HTTPS links, but the adoption rate here is going to be incredibly slow, and I think sites that convert over are going to be at a disadvantage for quite awhile.
Well put Dani, I hadn't even thought about the disadvantage of losing referral information. This will definitely be interesting to watch!
Well, I think that is just stupid way to ahead over ranking I don't agree with this step of google. I think they need to think before doing anything like that how can a personal blogger implement secure socket layer over his site, if he/she doesn't have, that was totally crapware.
Before Google's announcement, most of the experts were guessing that security may be new ranking parameter but Heartbleed Bug make it confirmed that security is the next ranking factor.
its really a stupid way , if that goes users wont get there wright sites in their locality search , have to lost lots of usefull websites
The funny thing is although Mr. Snowden made privacy a huge concern for internet users where he publicly called for users using private browsing sessions and webmasters to provide encrypted websites, it really was the heartbleed bug that helped raise awareness of the need for securing the internet.
The ironic thing about the heartbleed bug is that it was a series of vulnerabilities found in OpenSSL; a method to secure websites to begin with. To now force websites to go to SSL to gain better search rankings when vulnerabilities with OpenSSL aren't completely fixed seems a bit irrational. Especially since most privately owned blogs and websites will probably need to rely on OpenSSL or an equivilent to comply with the new Google Standard.
We're a friendly, industry-focused community of developers, IT pros, digital marketers, and technology enthusiasts meeting, networking, learning, and sharing knowledge.