The Instigator
jimlav
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
crb772
Con (against)
Winning
6 Points

http vs https. https is better

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
crb772
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/12/2012 Category: Technology
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,110 times Debate No: 20349
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (8)
Votes (2)

 

jimlav

Pro

I am debating to support https.We need to secure all the websites.So https is better.http is very insecure.
crb772

Con


contention 1:
https is slower and requires a secure server and therefore would be much more expensive. Browsing doesn't require secure socket layer.


contention 2:It is more expensive. Requires a secure socket layer to implement and an encryption algorithm to encrypt the password and login.


Because of the compexity involved to access a website https is not necessary.


Debate Round No. 1
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by Phenomin 4 years ago
Phenomin
And for what reason do we need to secure all websites?
Posted by trippledubs 5 years ago
trippledubs
It is funny that BluePine says is "Nothing is 100% secure."

then iPwnuNOW says "However this does not mean 100% secure as BluePine suggests"
Posted by iPwnuNOW 5 years ago
iPwnuNOW
The type of websites that have "https" are definitely more secure. However, this does not mean 100% secure as BluePine suggests. I still support the creation of Secure Connection pages because of a more safe way of browsing.
Posted by BluePine 5 years ago
BluePine
Nothing is 100% secure. But anyway saying https should be adopted by all web sites is like saying all doors should be secured with multiple locks . Imagine coming home from work having the urge to take a leak, barely holding it, Now that would be really unpleasant and painful, possibly embarrassing, while with a regular lock you just had to spin one rgular key.
Posted by drafterman 5 years ago
drafterman
Congratulations, you just made a better argument than either of them combined. If I could vote for you, I would. In the end the use of HTTP and HTTPS is situational. Thus it doesn't make sense to say one is better or worse than the other.
Posted by watcha 5 years ago
watcha
Do "German Puddles" splash if you stomp in them?

SSL certificates are not free if you wish to have them signed by a reputable company. They are also not free to implement, it takes time and resources which cost money, not only to install but also to adapt the website to handle. They also have an ongoing cost, both in terms of server resources, and annual maintenance/renewal.

Furthermore, they have a cost in terms of user experience and performance, slowing websites down where it may have been completely unnecessary, at both the network data level and the presentation level (particularly noticeable on mobile phones). They also add costs to mobile users in terms of the data usage required.

Finally, SSL certificates are not necessarily secure themselves, there have been examples of them being hacked. While a normal webpage isn't secure either, at least users know that the normal webpage isn't securely encrypted, and can choose not to enter that specific information. When an SSL connection is hacked the user is far more vulnerable having believed that they were secure.
Posted by drafterman 5 years ago
drafterman
You can get SSL certificates for free, BTW.

What a wholly useless debate.
Posted by BluePine 5 years ago
BluePine
For a regular site and most of web sites are just regular, where there's basically nothing to hack I don't see the need of https. What would be the point to secure a site about german puddles ?
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by 16kadams 5 years ago
16kadams
jimlavcrb772Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: really at least con had a contentions. Con remember what I told you use sources.
Vote Placed by vmpire321 5 years ago
vmpire321
jimlavcrb772Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Noob fail.