[Rillington]

Originally Posted by Paul

There is also a lot of 'clueless Bull Crap' spouted about https and internet security.
'Not Secure' does not mean its bad, which is what they are trying to make out with that message.

Many sites simply do not need to be secure.
A news site for example, or indeed, any informational site.
In fact pretty much any site where you dont need to login, or provide private information.

I deliberately use that term btw, and not 'Personal information' which is a very vague term.
Passwords for example are private, and should always use https when being passed to a website.
On the other hand, there is very little reason to worry about your name being sent over http.

Thank you for your reply Paul.

I se it as a warning not to put personal information into a website without the padlock which is why it is good that this forum, for example, the https security and padlock.

With regard to downloading data from a website which does not have the padlock, and whether it be to browse or to keep as say an mp3 file, is there no difference as to whether it is safe to download data from that website and is https only about securing personal information that users give to the site, such as passwords and email addresses?

---------- Post added at 20:29 ---------- Previous post was at 20:26 ----------

Originally Posted by heero_yuy

People also make the mistake of thinking that https means that the site itself is secure. Only communication with the site is secure.

Thank you for your reply.

So when you say communication with the site do you mean passwords/emails addresses or do you mean all forms of communication, such as simply going to the site and streaming/downloading data from that website?