'Fun' with HSTS


There is nothing wrong with using good old-fashioned HTTP without encryption. There are situations where it is a perfectly reasonable thing to do, and the protocol shouldn’t be blindly tagged with dire warnings about people kidnapping your dog, stealing your credit cards, and secretly replacing your spouse with Folger’s Crystals.

Browser vendors disagree, for reasons not-entirely-wholesome, so it’s been an ongoing struggle at the office to deal with people who file helpdesk tickets about broken SSL on sites that never had SSL to begin with, and don’t understand that their browser is silently rewriting URLs and hiding the evidence.

With recent browser releases, it got to the point where we had to put SSL reverse proxies in front of a bunch of internal web sites just to shut up the whining. This was non-trivial, and left a number of sites only partially functional for most of a day (because of course this was so important that it couldn’t be tested, QA’d, or released on a weekend). Because once a site gets “upgraded” to HTTPS, the browser responds to any HTTP links like CNN covering a Trump rally.

That was Tuesday. Wednesday night, I was wandering through the desert on a sand-seal with no name, and out of the corner of my eye I saw my phone sync up about a dozen emails, all complaining about this new HSTS thingie (aka “SSL Bondage”).

Someone urgently needed access to a site that was rejecting SSL connections, so he CC’d a half-dozen people along with the helpdesk email address. Several of them responded to all, creating additional tickets. Several people responded to the responses.

When I’d finished merging the 10 duplicate tickets, my one-line response was “correct. we haven’t added HTTPS to that site yet”.


Comments via Isso

Markdown formatting and simple HTML accepted.

Sometimes you have to double-click to enter text in the form (interaction between Isso and Bootstrap?). Tab is more reliable.