Hi Alberto
On 20/11/2020 13:09, Alberto Bursi wrote:
<clip>
The only thing I can accept as a valid complaint against https by
default is the increased minimum space requirements, everything else I
really don't understand nor agree with.
It's exactly this I am referring to when I talk about the extras not the
steps the user will take to enable it. So why I mentioned to leave it as
optional and easy to do for those who wish (and have space) to have it.
Regards
Fernando
Yes it is nice to have everything ready and automated to be done with
a few clicks for those cases that require it. In fact I think this
would be a better solution for now so it will be possible to gather
gradually this transition (or not) from HTTP to HTTPS even for
local/lan applications and see how often people would opt to use it.
Still should it end up having HTTPS by default I see self-signed
certificates are the way to go. Yes there are the warnings and I
really don't think there is any issue with it.
Those accessing the router Web Interface are not 'normal' Internet
users and they know what they are doing so the warning from
self-signed certificates should not be a surprise for them.
And those cases when admins prefer they can always replace the
self-signed one for Let's Encrypt for example.
Regards
Fernando
-Alberto
_______________________________________________
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
_______________________________________________
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
