When People buy SSL Certificates for their websites, they can use it for all Pages in the domain. Why then they use it for selective pages only.
Typically you will find that all E-Commerce Solutions like Magento, ZenCart etc will have settings for Secure Page and Insecure Page.
They will typically have their Checkout and Payment Processing related pages secured using https while all other parts of the site will remain insecure.
Does using SSL in all Pages has a Performance Overhead? As in the Load on Server will increase if you used SSL in all Pages?
How will a Customer, Vendor, Payment Processor gain Confidence in your site if you didn't use SSL in your Home Page? As they will probably land in your Home Page only.
While it's true that encrypting public information is not as valuable, it's not the case that it's worthless because it provide authenticity.
Consider the New York Times website. It's not encrypted because all the information is public. However, if you were to MITM the WiFi network at a major financial conference and inject stories about a market crash, that could be an effective attack against the authenticity of the page.
Additionally, if forms are on unencrypted pages then it hardly matters if they submit over HTTPS because the attacker can rewrite the action URL and the user is none the wiser.
Basically, you only need to use SSL when you post and get data from the server which are sensitive.
There is no benefits to be SSL on a static web site that only throw general and public information to the browser.
SSL encrypt the data on the Request and response so yes, your performance can suffer for nothing on the static part of your web site.
Related
I have a webapp hosted on firebase hosting at example.com. Firebase provisions a SSL for the root domain. I now connected a ghost blog hosted on heroku at subdomain blog.example.com. I do process credit card payments through my webapp (root domain). Now I am unclear if i should purchase a SSL certificate from third party and provision it with my subdomain(blog.example.com). Is it required for my blog? can it affect my root domain security? WOuld a free SSL from something like Let's encrypt me enough for the blog subdomain .
The short answer is that: No, your blog being unsecured won't affect your webapp's HTTPS security on the root domain (actually called the "apex domain", although usually www.example.com is also made to work the same as the apex domain in web browsers).
When someone visits your secure webapp via the domain example.com, the webapp will present to the client a certificate that is only valid for example.com (and maybe some/all subdomains) that was signed by a certificate authority that most clients keep in their root trust store. This verifies to a decent degree of certainty that the page they are loading is actually from the person/organization that owns the example.com domain. The client/server then do a key exchange and then start enciphering the acutal payload of the HTTP session. This ensures data between the client/server hasn't been modified, and the connection cannot be eavesdropped upon.
You can run other services at blog.example.com or somethingelse.example.com and that wouldn't affect security for users going to example.com.
The plausible reason that you might want to use HTTPS on your blog is if your blog contains links to point users towards your secure site, and you want to make sure users always get directed from those links appropriately. Since your blog is unsecured, anyone with a privileged network position can modify how your blog looks to someone that loads it. State or ISP actors could modify how your blog looks almost anywhere, but even a simpler example of a malicious user at a coffee shop can affect how other browsers at the coffee shop load unsecured sites virtually undetectably. Imagine if your blog contains a link "click here to go to my main site and give me money" but the link was modified to go to a phishing site to allow the attacker to steal users' passwords and/or money.
Only you can decide if this means your blog should have security. While setting up HTTPS can be more work, encrypting everything by default certainly can only help, and many people have undertaken this mantra in the past few years. Certainly Let's Encrypt would be good enough for this.
I am bulding a marketplace which store users session ect.... I just added a SSL encryption for login and for the payment (I am using stripe as a payment gateway). I have seen sites like facebook forcing HTTPS on every page so that got me wondering, should I force HTTPS on every page or just on login and payment?
side note, apparently SSL encrypted pages load faster
Yes. But not just because it loads faster, or even ranks better on Google than non-HTTPS sites, but mainly because of security. Having HTTPS makes it harder to do a man-in-the-middle attack, whereby an attack intercepts the connection between your website and the user to either steal or modify data. The trouble with HTTP is that it is possible for someone to do exactly that, and then modify the links to point to a fake login page to steal data (this souunds paranoid but it happens).
While many pages use a script to check if the user is attempting to access HTTP and then redirect them to a HTTPS version, this might still be an issue for websites as attackers can still 'strip' out any HTTPS links (known as the SSLStrip attack) to use only HTTP and then view the data, take a look at enabling HSTS (HTTP Strict Transport Security) for enhanced security to avoid that. This is done by forcing browsers to only interact with the website on HTTPS connections and avoid any sort of downgrade attack.
SSL is very important to protecting users private data on your website.
The more I see SSL used on websites; I have noticed that it is not used all the time like Facebook, Ebay, Google (Youtube) etc...
So my question is: Why pay for a SSL and have the ability to encrypt data while it travels over insecure networks (Internet mainly) then not use it on the whole site?.
Why only encrypt parts of sites?
Why not just force SSL on page load?
It does occur to me that it must be a good reason as it does not slow done the page by having one.
I was thinking of getting a SSL for my website so people can contact me without other people being able to see what they are sending (in case sensitive information really). So should I encrypt the whole site or just that one page.
Thankyou for any help / thoughts on this matter.
Have a good day :)
Why pay for a SSL and have the ability to encrypt data while it
travels over insecure networks (Internet mainly) then not use it on
the whole site?
In theory a webpage over SSL is slower, so some people avoided putting the whole site under SSL.
Should I encrypt the whole site or just that one page.
The whole site would be easier, and I doubt your site would have any problems with performance based on SSL.
I really appreciate your thinking to make your whole website run over encrypted channel with SSL security. Many websites avoid to use ssl on all webpages, but in my personal opinion; if your website contains account log-in and sign-up on every page then it should be protected.
Whether you are running website over HTTP or HTTPS, it rarely affects website loading time & affect your website performances. In current time attacker always try to attack on website anyhow. Secure transmission of data reduces the risk of hacking and allows user to trust upon your website.
I'm running a dating site and not using SSL at the moment.
I've noticed major sites like facebook and twitter do not use https for login but just use plain old http, is there really any advantage to https-ing my site or it is only for cc transactions or so ?
thanks in advance.
Actually, facebook does use https for its login:
<form method="POST" action="https://login.facebook.com/login.php?login_attempt=1" id="login_form">
as does twitter:
<form method="post" id="signin" action="https://twitter.com/sessions">
You'll notice they don't use https for the page that displays the signin form. That's because it isn't necessary.
However, it's a good idea to use ssl the login itself if you can, if only because so many users employ the same password for all sites.
One solution, which I'd like to see more sites employ, is using OpenID/OAuth for login instead of requiring a username/password.
SSL encrypts the traffic between the browser and the server. So virtaully anything you want to be secure needs to be ssl'ed. Google search is even doing it so poeople can't have their search terms intercepted.
Its just the case of what YOU want secure, and if not having certain parts of your site secure will keep wanted customers away. I would think a dating site has a lot of personal demographics information that some people might want secure... just my 2 cents.
SSL is used only when transmitting sensitive data between browser and server. It's fine for major sites like facebook and twitter to use http (as long as the data is not sensitive). Most website use SSL for their login page. SSL also used by payment gateway to safely transfer payment information through the wire.
And by the way, http is not "plain old" and https is not new trend either :)
If your users are providing any sensitive data, ssl prevents it from being intercepted by a third party. If you don't use SSL, you should assume that some third party can see everything that every one of your users does on your website. If you are comfortable with them seeing this information, then keep it plain http, but if you don't like that thought, go https.
Another benefit of ssl is that it allows the use of Strict Transport Security, which not only forces https on all site activity, but also prevents a man in the middle from spoofing your site to a user and making them think they are accessing your site. Details here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strict_Transport_Security
I work at a major ISP and am infatuated with one of your online members. By sniffing your packets, I can find out when and where she's meeting another member, rewrite the packet to change the location so the other guy doesn't show up, and then make my move.
You decide whether that's acceptable to your users.
Https is useful to protect the credential (user/password) , but it increases the network load and requires more CPU resource (encryption). Thus, it is common to use only for authentication.
Https ,with server certificate protects again phising.
Banks uses end to end application
I have a client that needs SSL to protect online donations, but I have limited experience with how/when to use SSL.
I understand that in purchasing a certificate that I am assigning that certificate to an entire domain (IP address really). Is there a way to isolate the encryption to only a single page of the website, or should I just go ahead and secure the entire site even though only one page needs it?
Unsure of best practice here. Please advise.
SSL incurs quite a bit of extra processing time. For low bandwidth sites, the extra processing required by SSL is not really noticeable. But for sites with heavy traffic like Facebook, Twitter and Flickr, the load caused by SSL is heavy enough that they would have to use dedicated SSL encoding/decoding hardware.
So basically yes, it makes sense to minimize the number of pages using SSL. That is why you often see banking sites only protect the actual account pages via https. The home/landing page is usually plain old http.
On the other hand, unless you really are a site like Twitter or Facebook or Gmail, worrying about this is a bit of a premature optimization. First do it simple if you can. Be aware of this issue and be aware of upgrade strategies when your site finally get heavy traffic.
My boss has a saying:
This is a happy problem to have. First solve the sad problem of
not having enough users then you'd be happy to have a problem that
requires you to refactor your architecture.
You don't encrypt a website with SSL. you encrypt the connection. Therefore if you have SSL enabled for the webserver simply adding https:// to the url will encrypt the connection and whatever page the url points to will be encrypted while in transit.
so
https://www.website.com/index.html is encrypted and http://www.website.com/index.html is NOT encrypted
I prefer for that to never happen so I always put my encrypted pages in a subdomain eg.
https://secure.website.com/index.html
SSL comes with a couple of gotcha's
1/ a basic SSL certificate will only be valid for a specific domain name so if the certificate for is www.website.com and someone follows a link for website.com a warning will be displayed. (see note below)
2/ SSL requires a dedicated IP (which you appear to have). that means you may have problems if you are on a shared platform. this is because in HTTP the host or domain name is part of the headers but the headers are encrypted so the server can't know where to route the request to. (see note below)
It sounds like you really need to employ the services of someone familiar with ecommerce and SSL to help you. navigating the minefield with limited knowledge and forum responses is not the safest thing to do. especially if financial transactions are taking place because there are other requirements that must be considered such as the legal requirements in storing and using financial information such as credit card numbers.
DC
Addendum:
For donations consider Paypal. They have a complete donation solution and more people will trust it than a roll your own solution.
EDIT 2016:
The world moves on and some of the advice above is not as true as it was when originally answered.
SSL no longer requires a dedicated IP address. SNI (Server name indication) resolves that and is almost universal now (IE8 on winXP does not support it and a few phones).
You will find most certificate vendors now include the main domain name as a SAN (subject alternative name) in a certificate. Which is to say they will provide a certificate for both www.website.moc and website.moc if you get a certificate for www.website.moc. Do not assume this, make sure your certification authority specifies it.
also, you mentioned that an SSL certificate protects an IP address. This is incorrect. An SSL certificate corresponds to a domain. Many schemes exist where several domains share a single IP address. If one of these shared domains has an SSL certificate, that certificate is only good for that domain, not the others.
Cookie security is the main thing that I'd point to for your approach.
A user that logs in on your secure login page gets a cookie for their session, right? That cookie's then being transmitted in plain text for someone watching the wire (Firesheep) to intercept and steal the session.
There is additional overhead in terms of negotiation time and CPU load from SSL, but it's rather minimal. If there's anything sensitive going on on your site, just use SSL everywhere.
The other answers are inaccurate in this regard: An SSL certificate binds to BOTH a dedicated IP address that is assigned to a static single domain name, unless you purchase a wild card SSL. Both the domain name and IP must match the certificate.