Připomínky Opery k protokolu SPDY, nástupce HTTP

Napsal Martin Schlemmer;810873

Proč by přechod na SSL měl představovat vůbec nějaký problém? Podle mě SPDY naopak řeší dvě mouchy jednou ranou - rychlou a šifrovanou komunikaci.

Odkazovaný článek ani váš příspěvek nerozvádí, v čem je to problematické.

SPDY changes that. In order to operate a SPDY website you need a SSL certificate. SSL certificates are issued by a limited number of organizations.

Currently Iran is being blocked by SWIFT. So, money transfers in and out of the country are more or less impossible. So, if SPDY was to be HTTP 2.0 and SSL would be a hard requirement there would be no way for some Iranian guy to set up a website. Google probably doesn't care much about this, they don't have issues getting SSL certificates. Other organizations might and this concerns me. Should people with bad credit ratings be allowed to set up websites?

EDIT: There are free ways of getting a valid SSL certificate. However, this still doesn't change the principle of the web being less open. Getting clearance from any authority reduces the openness of the web, even if you don't have to pay someone.

The openness of the web is much of the reason for its success. We should fight hard to keep it open.

At some point in the future DNSSEC might change this, being a good transport for certificates. We'd get rid of those pesky CAs which would further increase security on the web. Great, but it is currently to far into the future for us to rely heavliy on it.