SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Paul Schreiber blogs about the tech behind the websites of presidential candidates. "So, you want to run a country. Can you hire someone who can run a website? ...Here's how the (declared) candidates' sites fare." There's a table comparing 4 candidates' sites based on HTTPS, URL permutations, IPv6, SSL rating, and other related qualities. Schreiber mentions that he will "update this as more candidates declare or sites change."
From the blog comments
HillaryClinton.com was using IIS (and no https) until Sunday morning, when they switched over.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Website Tech of Presidential Candidates Compared
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 53 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
I am a bookaholic. If you are a decent person, you will not sell me
another book.
(Score: 1) by Fauxlosopher on Saturday April 18 2015, @04:39AM
As an addendum to my previous reply [soylentnews.org] to your comment:
If you have criminals in your ISP and government, the proper fix is not to point fingers and blame at website owners who are not using a mostly-broken security system.
The proper fix is to seize the criminals and punish them after following due process.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 18 2015, @12:21PM
Wishfuil thinking and absolutism go hand in hand.
Meanwhile in the real world, real engineers are focused on practical solutions that can get results today, not theoretical results in a theoretical perfect world.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 18 2015, @09:56PM
HTTPS as-is does not "get results" today, which was the point originally being made.
While there are limited use cases where HTTPS as-is does offer some benefit, those benefits are overshadowed by the system's brokenness.
People pointing to as-is HTTPS as a "practical solution" are lazy, ignorant, or working for the NSA.
(Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Saturday April 18 2015, @03:36PM
"Hey, the door you installed me has no lock!"
"So what? If you have criminals in your neighbourhood, don't blame the people not installing locks on doors. Catch and punish the burglars!"
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 1) by Fauxlosopher on Saturday April 18 2015, @06:37PM
If you believe that your likely-typical door locks and deadbolts are the things that keep criminals out of your house, you are sadly [youtube.com] mistaken [youtube.com]. Locks are used to deter the drunk/confused from ending up in your living room instead of on your porch, or to act as a different type of doorbell to let you know that you need to grab your shotgun instead of your pants.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 18 2015, @07:11PM
Well, I have all-metal doors and all the windows also have metal bars. That should slow down the fuckers.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 18 2015, @07:21PM
I was going to agree with you, but frame is typically the weakest spot. Here's a solid wooden door set in a metal frame [youtube.com], and it does take a significant amount of work to get through. Proper frame and door reinforcements can make forced entry effectively impervious to humans lacking power tools [youtube.com]...
... but then there's nothing stopping someone from using a buzzsaw to simply cut a new doorway in a wall, or driving a tank into your house.
Nonetheless, taking simple and inexpensive steps to reinforce entryways can help keep the home's owner from being low-hanging fruit for criminals.