Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • Home
  • SEARCH
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 3604826
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 18, 20262026-05-18T21:02:49+00:00 2026-05-18T21:02:49+00:00

Instead of just having a few select pages for HTTPS access, I was thinking

  • 0

Instead of just having a few select pages for HTTPS access, I was thinking about just using SSL for my entire site.

What would be the drawbacks to this?

I would like to allow social service logins (like FaceBook), but we will also be storing credit card information, which is why SSL is essential. Would there be any other problems with this?

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-18T21:02:49+00:00Added an answer on May 18, 2026 at 9:02 pm

    It is highly recommended these days to run the entire site on TLS (https that is) if possible.

    The overhead concern is a thing of the past, it is no longer an issue with the newer TLS protocols, because it is now maintaining sessions, and even caching them for reuse if the client drops the connection. In the old days this was not the case. Which means that today, the only time you have to do public-key crypto(the type that is cpu heavy) is when establishing the connection. So there isn’t really any drawbacks when you have a cert anyway. This means that you won’t have to send people back and forth between http and https, and the customers will always see the lock sign in their browser.

    Extra attention has been drawn to this subject after the release of Firesheep. As you might’ve heard Firesheep is a Firefox addon that let’s you easily (if you are both using the same open wifi network) highjack other people’s sessions on sites like Facebook, Twitter etc. This works because those sites only use TLS selectively, and this would not be a problem for them if TLS was enabled site-wide.

    So, in conclusion, the cons (such as added CPU use) are negligible with the state of current technology, and the pros are clear, so serve all content via SSL/TLS! It’s the way to go these days.

    Edit: As mentioned in other answers, another problem with serving some of a site’s content (like images) without SSL/TLS, is that customers/users will get a very annoying “unsecure content on secure page” message.

    Also, as stated by thirtydot, you should redirect people to the https site. And you can even enable the flag that makes your server deny non-ssl connections.

    Another edit: As pointed out in a comment below, remember that SSL/TLS isn’t the only solution to all your site’s security needs, there is still a lot of other considerations, but it does solve a few security issues for the users, and solves them well (Even though there are ways to do a man-in-the-middle, even with SSL/TLS)

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

Instead of just filling out the form in HTML it should also be possible
Not that it is seriously burdensome to type :My_custom_foobar() instead of just :my_custom_foobar() but
In C, is there a difference between writing struct foo instead of just foo
I'm just learning Perl. When is it advisable to use OO Perl instead of
...instead of using the Atom syndication format? Atom is a well-defined , general-purpose XML
Instead of relying on my host to send an email, I was thinking of
Instead of having to remember to initialize a simple 'C' structure, I might derive
Instead of hardcoding the default @author template I would like Eclipse to use user's
Right now: I have a few personal software projects I develop (just me, and
I've thrown myself headfirst into C# and .Net 2.0 using Linq, and I'm having

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.