W3C

Edit comment LC-2029 for Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group

Quick access to

Previous: LC-2023 Next: LC-2030

Comment LC-2029
:
Commenter: casays <casays@yahoo.com>

or
Resolution status:

d) Informing the user that there are security implications in
the way he chooses to access the server, and providing him with
an alternative link to it risks causing the following reactions:
i. WWW-beginners may simply not bother reading the advice and
always take the default action, which according to the
guidelines seems to correspond to taking the less safe,
point-to-point HTTPS connection.
ii. Somewhat WWW-knowledgeable users, aware of the existence of
Trojan horses and phishing, may reel at the invitation to try
alternative links. If they are curious and examine the URI of
the current page, they may further suspect foul play, as the
rewritten URI may not match the one they accessed originally.
iii. Expert WWW-users will understand the implications of the
proxy set-up, but may be wary at using its services for HTTPS
links -- after all, what is the guarantee that the proxy will
not misuse or unintentionally disclose private information in
a point-to-point connection? And if there is a proxy acting as
middle-man, what is the guarantee that the end-to-end HTTPS
link is actually an end-to-end one and the proxy is not just
performing some other tricky manipulations?

Overall, fiddling with HTTPS connections risks reducing, rather
than increasing, the willingness of end-users to access the
mobile Web. A relevant point is that these end-users may
actually assign the fault with the untrustworthy connections
to the content or application provider, rather than to the
operator of the proxy.
(space separated ids)
(Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)


Developed and maintained by Dominique Hazaël-Massieux (dom@w3.org).
$Id: 2029.html,v 1.1 2017/08/11 06:43:16 dom Exp $
Please send bug reports and request for enhancements to w3t-sys.org