Top
Best
New

Posted by jhalderm 10/28/2025

HTTPS by default(security.googleblog.com)
302 points | 255 commentspage 3
dist-epoch 10/28/2025|
> HTTPS adoption expressed as a percentage of main frame page loads

Why is Linux adoption at 80% when MacOS/Android/Windows are at 95%? Quite unexpected.

noirscape 10/28/2025||
They mention it later in the article; if they drop connections to internal networks from the graph, Linux shoots up all the way to 97%.

The answer is probably that people that run Linux are far more likely to run a homelab intranet that isn't secured by HTTPS, because internal IP addresses and hostnames are a hassle to get certificates for. (Not to mention that it's slightly pointless on most intranets to use HTTPS.)

resfirestar 10/28/2025|||
This is addressed in the article.

> If you exclude navigations to private sites, then the distribution becomes much tighter across platforms. In particular, Linux jumps from 84% HTTPS to nearly 97% HTTPS when limiting the analysis to public sites only.

Sounds like it's just because a large chunk of Linux usage is for web interfaces on the local machine or network, rather than everyday web browsing.

duskwuff 10/28/2025||
Speculation, but: there are probably quite a few Linux systems displaying internal dashboards over HTTP, with the page set to auto-refresh.
jeffbee 10/28/2025||
Tendency of Linux users to have local resources that lack TLS? phpmyadmin, netdata, duckdb ui, git-webui, whatever.
shadowgovt 10/28/2025||
Silly question and one I should probably already know the answer to but never really got around to thinking through: are there practical concerns for not doing TLS in your home intranet?

It means that if someone has patched into your local network they can access anything in there, but they have to get in first, right? So how concerned should one be in these scenarios

(a) one has wifi with WPA2 enabled

(b) there's a Verizon-style router to the outside world but everything is wired on the house side?

noirscape 10/28/2025|||
Main reason is that it's hard to get certificates for intranets that all devices will properly trust.

Public CAs don't issue (free) certificates for internal hostnames and running your own CA has the drawback that Android doesn't allow you to "properly" use a personal CA without root, splitting it's CA list between the automatically trusted system CA list and the per-application opt-in user CA list. (It ought to be noted that Apple's personal CA installation method uses MDM, which is treated like a system CA list). There's also random/weird one-offs like how Firefox doesn't respect the system certificate store, so you need to import your CA certificate separately in Firefox.

The only real option without running into all those problems is to get a regular (sub)domain name and issue certificates for that, but that usually isn't free or easy. Not to mention that if you do the SSL flow "properly", you need to issue one certificate for each device, which leaks your entire intranet to the certificate transparency log (this is the problem with Tailscale's MagicDNS as a solution). Alternatively you need to issue a wildcard certificate for your domains, but that means that every device in your intranet can have a valid SSL certificate for any other domain name on your certificate.

antisol 10/28/2025|||
If someone is in your LAN then you have bigger problems than them snooping on you while you talk to your fridge.
MonaroVXR 10/29/2025||
Like eBay? Slightly different https://nullsweep.com/why-is-this-website-port-scanning-me/
antisol 10/29/2025||
oh wow, port scanning with websockets! Interesting! Thanks for the link! :)
dist-epoch 10/28/2025|||
> get a regular (sub)domain name

You can get $2/yr domain names on weird TLDs like .site, .cam, .link, ...

> which leaks your entire intranet to the certificate transparency log

Not necessarily, you don't route the domain externally, and use offline DNS challenge/request to renew the certificate.

noirscape 10/28/2025||
> You can get $2/yr domain names on weird TLDs like .site, .cam, .link, ...

You can, but as stated - that's not free (or easy). That's still yet another fee you have to pay for... which hurts adoption of HTTPS for intranets (not to mention it's not really an intranet if it's reliant on something entirely outside of that intranet.)

If LetsEncrypt charged 1$ to issue/renew a certificate, they wouldn't have made a dent in the public adoption of HTTPS certificates.

> Not necessarily, you don't route the domain externally, and use offline DNS challenge/request to renew the certificate.

I already mentioned that one, that's the wildcard method.

jabroni_salad 10/28/2025||||
Perhaps you might worry about hostile IOT doodads snooping on things that arent their business or making insecure public webpages with UPNP. If it is just devices you truly control and you never expose an unhardened device, then a walled garden can be fine.

Also, if WPA2 ever becomes extremely broken. There was a period of 3-5 yrs where WEP was taking forever to die at the same time that https was taking forever to become commonplace and you could easily join networks and steal facebook credentials out of the air. If you lived in an apartment building and had an account get hacked between maybe 2008-2011, you were probably affected by this.

dist-epoch 10/28/2025|||
Everything that matters in your home intranet should already be password protected and firewalled.
lateforwork 10/29/2025||
> One year from now, with the release of Chrome 154 in October 2026...

Wait a minute, how do they know what version Chrome will be at a year from now?

cbowal 10/29/2025||
Chrome has a set release schedule, shipping a new major release every four weeks.

https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/HEAD/docs/p...

nhumrich 10/29/2025|||
Google has a time machine
dopa42365 10/29/2025|||
https://chromestatus.com/roadmap

>Chrome 154 Stable next year (Oct 7, 2026)

elcritch 10/29/2025||
Chrome moved to a time based release cadence.
not4uffin 10/29/2025||
I see this as pretty much only a positive thing.
EGreg 10/29/2025|
This is what things should be like chatting programs and end-to-end encryption.

But in every case by the way, we kinda trust the makers of this software. They can easily ship backdoors to specific users. Same with crypto wallets etc.

Traubenfuchs 10/29/2025||
I for one hate https. Some html5 apis like location do not work without it and you get big fat warnings if you don‘t use it.

From having to pay for it in the past to now having to set up lets-encrypt, certbot, https-ingresses!

God, half my hobbyist and raw non-helm kubernetes config is https related. https-ingress.yaml is gigantic!

Is this really the best devex we could come up with?

MBCook 10/28/2025||
Does this apply to requests made by JS or just page loads?
bagol 10/29/2025||
How dangerous is plain http?
nakamoto_damacy 10/28/2025||
Security theatre is all it is. Protect us from petty thieves but let our employers and the gov MITM our comms.
minitech 10/29/2025|
> Security theatre is all it is. Protect us from petty thieves

Even picking the most dismissive wording you can, you contradict yourself.

pKropotkin 10/28/2025||
Thanks God, i am not using google
mistrial9 10/28/2025|
"cannot connect" is next ?