Safe Mode: On
SSL Liveleak.com placing https:// on entire site? Thoughts?
 Part of channel(s): Yoursay (promoted)

Come one Liveleak most of us live here and it would be nice to use liveleak under SSL (not just the login) its easy to do and would make it a more secure site..

Thoughts?


Added: Jan-15-2012 Occurred On: Jan-15-2012
By: peterjames2009
In:
Your Say
Tags: liveleak, liveleak.com, secure, SSL, https,
Location: United States (load item map)
Views: 1307 | Comments: 24 | Votes: 3 | Favorites: 0 | Shared: 0 | Updates: 0 | Times used in channels: 2
You need to be registered in order to add comments! Register HERE
Sort by: Newest first | Oldest first | Highest score first
Liveleak opposes racial slurs - if you do spot comments that fall into this category, please report them for us to review.
  • Comment of user 'OwenHiggins' has been deleted by author (after account deletion)!
  • yes it's more secure, but SSL is generally slower too.

    Posted Jan-15-2012 By 

    (2) | Report

    • @wptech Depends, if you let the sessions time out it will be a lot slower. If you can substain a session you won't notice much difference. Especially if accelerated.

      Posted Jan-15-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @rumplestiltskin yeah, but in general, there is more bandwidth being used than without ssl, because it has to read the certificate everytime anything loads. And really, ssl is just for protecting sensitive data being transferred on the server to protect that data. I don't know how necessary it is for every page and item to be ssl encrypted on a site like LL. not like we're passing cc info or SS# etc..

      Posted Jan-16-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @wptech There are entities who are very much interested in what you look at in general. Some are legit, some are less legit. Also, without SSL/TLS there is 0 protection for you when it comes to deep packet inspection and manipulation of data. Let's say NSA wants to wiretap your computer. They'll get a warrant to silently redirect traffic at your ISP and inject trojans and whatnot into the content. You can't protect yourself from that. That scenario can become a reality without SSL/TLS. It's stil More..

      Posted Jan-16-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

  • Better the devil you know,than the one you dont....just leave things as they are...

    Posted Jan-15-2012 By 

    (2) | Report

  • I would love me some TLS/SSL protocol, but why? It's not like we are buying anything from LiveLeak.

    Right now, what is the worst that could happen, someone change your comments on your post.

    Or, are you thinking of opening a LL store?

    Posted Jan-15-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

  • I think it's a great idea.

    Posted Jan-15-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

  • What exactly will it do?

    Posted Jan-15-2012 By 

    (0) | Report

  • Not really necessary.

    Posted Jan-15-2012 By 

    (0) | Report

  • Unnecessary.

    Posted Jan-15-2012 By 

    (0) | Report

  • @Airedale care to share any info on anyone cracking 256bit SSL encryption?
    yes the end points are the weakest point and they have found exploits on some certs /weak frames or exploits for stripping the SSL connection etc but many of these are to do with badly configured servers.. im already guessing the LL programmers know what to do.

    Im thinking this more for countries which filter their internet

    Posted Jan-16-2012 By 

    (0) | Report

  • Comment of user 'OwenHiggins' has been deleted by author (after account deletion)!
  • On a site like LiveLeak, I don't see the need for general content to move encrypted through the Internet. The encryption merely adds a lot of extra burden on the servers and might increase the latency.

    Posted Jan-16-2012 By 

    (0) | Report

  • Secure sockets is fine with me ... was there a securty issue of late?

    Posted Jan-16-2012 By 

    (0) | Report