Why does your use case trump all other use cases for users on the internet?
Just because your use of HTTP doesn’t expose users to risks (technically it does to MitM) doesn’t mean users shouldn’t be warned about the risks of HTTP by their browser.
You’re annoyed at browsers, not HTTPS or CAs. There’s nothing in the specifications / RFCs that HTTP warnings are MUSTs.
Yeah. I hate browsers for making me put up with this, not HTTPS as a concept or the third parties. I’m sorry if this came across as a dog on HTTPS itself, because it’s not. It’s about Google forcing me to jump through hoops for them because if my site throws errors on Chrome then my site might as well not exist.
Why does your use case trump all other use cases for users on the internet?
Just because your use of HTTP doesn’t expose users to risks (technically it does to MitM) doesn’t mean users shouldn’t be warned about the risks of HTTP by their browser.
You’re annoyed at browsers, not HTTPS or CAs. There’s nothing in the specifications / RFCs that HTTP warnings are MUSTs.
Yeah. I hate browsers for making me put up with this, not HTTPS as a concept or the third parties. I’m sorry if this came across as a dog on HTTPS itself, because it’s not. It’s about Google forcing me to jump through hoops for them because if my site throws errors on Chrome then my site might as well not exist.