Timeline for Downsides to using HTTPS
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 2, 2015 at 12:18 | comment | added | Lie Ryan | @StuartCaie: A 2nd party cache will still uses the ISP's external bandwidth usage. I am quite sure somewhere there are ISPs that distinguish between cached, local, and international bandwidth and have different pricing between them. Even if they don't actually distinguish them, the ISP's cost for external bandwidth will indirectly be reflected into your plan, so if everyone bypasses the cache that would force the ISP to increase price to cover cost. | |
| Aug 22, 2014 at 16:15 | comment | added | Lie Ryan | Cache-Control only controls browser caching in HTTPS, which isn't the issue here. | |
| Aug 22, 2014 at 15:26 | comment | added | user |
Don't forget Cache-Control: public which can help, as long as the cache can act as a HTTPS endpoint.
|
|
| Aug 22, 2014 at 13:54 | comment | added | Stuart Caie | 3rd parties cannot cache resources under HTTPS, but 2nd parties can. If you actually need to provide localised caching for your resources, you can use a Content Delivery Network. Each CDN host, which users reach by anycast, can have the same hostname and SSL certificate, because each host is controlled by the same company. The SSL certificate can list a singular hostname and all possible IP addresses in the SubjectAltName section. | |
| Aug 22, 2014 at 10:52 | history | edited | Lie Ryan | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 132 characters in body
|
| Aug 22, 2014 at 10:38 | history | edited | Lie Ryan | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 89 characters in body
|
| Aug 22, 2014 at 10:31 | history | answered | Lie Ryan | CC BY-SA 3.0 |