Kevin's Watch

Chrome warns me, while I'm on KW, that the site is not secure. I"ve noticed the message for the last few months. Is that something to be worried about?

Chrome now marks all unencrypted websites as 'not secure.'
Change took place last summer. All HTTP sites are flagged as not secure. HTTPS sites are unaffected.

Chrome is shiny.
That's all I have to offer.

The site certificate would be bad and give you a warning anyway.

This site IS insecure. Don't post your credit card number.

wayfriend wrote:The site certificate would be bad and give you a warning anyway.

This site IS insecure. Don't post your credit card number.

Whoopsy...

Haha, yeah, as SD said, all non-SSL sites will show a warning. Nothing to worry about.

--A

Well, the firewall at work won't let kevinswatch through any more. Probably cuz of the bad certificate. Not sure if I should ask for an exemption ... I don't really have a business purpose here.

So I have to turn WiFi off on my phone to post here now. Trouble is I always forget to to turn it back on.

wayfriend wrote:Well, the firewall at work won't let kevinswatch through any more. Probably cuz of the bad certificate. Not sure if I should ask for an exemption ... I don't really have a business purpose here.

So I have to turn WiFi off on my phone to post here now. Trouble is I always forget to to turn it back on.

There was a time (a long time ago) that Sonicwall firewalls blocked KW because the content was listed as "magic".

Which is true.

I was always able to whitelist it. I justified it because it was a resource to find answers. (there is a technology forum after all)

Yeah, it's not a bad certificate, so much as a non-existent one.

Sorry WF, probably not gonna be installing one any time soon.

--A

Well I asked our IT department and they told me that this site has been blacklisted by a third party firewall vendor, who they will not identify to me. (Big companies - amiright?)

Just passing it on.

I should add, none of the main security sites like Norton are reporting issues with this site. They still declare it "safe".

So I believe this is a content issue. Some corporate wonk deemed the site too contraversial or too unsafe for work or too big a liability. So they blacklisted it out of hand.

If so, that's plausible. Look at what gets posted here.

Anyway, this will reduce my activity to near zero.

Or my guess they decided it was too social-orientated. We have Facebook and Twitter blocked for that reason.

Daily I'm glad for my job. Nothing is blocked here. (Of course, we work on social media etc. so they couldn't anyway...)

--A

wayfriend wrote:I should add, none of the main security sites like Norton are reporting issues with this site. They still declare it "safe".

So I believe this is a content issue. Some corporate wonk deemed the site too contraversial or too unsafe for work or too big a liability. So they blacklisted it out of hand.

If so, that's plausible. Look at what gets posted here.

Anyway, this will reduce my activity to near zero.

My understanding is that the blacklisting isn't really about KW, but is related to some other site hosted on ihugny. One bad apple spoiling the entire barrel.

Hi peeps... I finally started updating some of my knowledge about internet security this last summer...
(Disclaimer: some of the very people who already posted on this thread probably know a lot more than I do.)
...and then I realized that when someone first tries to connect to KW, our lack of SSL would be very discouraging.
(Like a big giant flashing warning and a yellow page far worse than a 404-not-found would discourage me if I didn't already have a connection to KW.)

So I was like "oh man. the site certificate warning is throttling us from getting new members."

and now it's affecting our peeps too...

I re-read the thread where Vain had been thinking about migrating to Vanilla boards.
It was a v. good idea, and he put in a lot of work.

Av was right; we needed SSL.
Vain did a bunch of work to migrate, and I wish I could go back in time and say "yes we want vanilla boards!"

but.. cant go back in time... wonder what will we do now?

wf- interesting.
I like how you were like, "Hrmmm. Wonder if I should ask for an exemption for KW."
And then three days later, "Here's what an IT guy said."
(KW <3!)

[Edit: changed some stuff in the two lines. didn't like my original tone... meh.]

Sadly, it appears that the sheer size of our database makes it difficult to migrate for some reason, and for obvious reasons we're not keen on leaving behind all this history.

I'll drop Vain a mail about an SSL (he's been a bit distant lately though) and see what he says. You can get a free one, but they're only good for 90 days and have to be constantly renewed.

--A

thank you for mentioning the 90 days thing, Av!
...that was not on my "radar."

Just wondering...
Are ssl licenses something where there's a "free version" and a "purchasable version"?
(and if so...) Is that piece of maintenance that needs done every 90 days (renewing the SSL license and w/e that entails) less troublesome if you have a purchased license?

Savor Dam wrote:My understanding is that the blacklisting isn't really about KW, but is related to some other site hosted on ihugny. One bad apple spoiling the entire barrel.

Yeah, keep telling yourself that Savor. I've found the collective noun for Fukups, it's KW Mods.

Welcome to the leper colony.

Linna Heartbooger wrote:
Just wondering...

Yes, pretty much. The free version is a relatively new thing, paid ones are valid for a year before renewal is required, just like your domain.

--A