Author Topic: Secured Weather Sites  (Read 293 times)

Randall75

  • Storm
  • *****
  • Posts: 1203
  • CWOP-CW6734 WeatherUnderground-KOHNEWAR6
    • CW6734
    • KOHNEWAR6
    • Randy's Weather On The Hill
  • Station Details: Davis Vantage Pro 2 Plus.iMac i5 Sierra 10.12.6 8GB Ram, WeatherCat 3,Logitech 9000 Pro Web Cam
Secured Weather Sites
« on: September 19, 2018, 05:51:21 PM »
Does anyone here have their weather site set up as secured?
Godaddy contacted me to day to see if I wanted to upgrade mine to https.
That with the new updates coming some people may not be able to view my site with the updates like Chrome.
Do we really need to do that?

Thanks

cheers

Blicj11

  • Storm
  • *****
  • Posts: 3024
    • EW3808
    • KUTHEBER6
    • Timber Lakes Utah
  • Station Details: Davis Vantage Pro2 Plus | WeatherLinkIP™ Data Logger | iMac (late 2013), 3.5 GHz Intel Core i7, 24 GB RAM, macOS Mojave | Sharx SCNC2900 Webcam | Supportive Wife
Re: Secured Weather Sites
« Reply #1 on: September 19, 2018, 08:16:01 PM »
Randall:

I know that several of us have switched to a secure site, including Reinhard and me. We really shouldn't have to do it, because we aren't collecting viewer information. The reason I did it is because browsers are now warning people that they are viewing an "unsafe" or an "unsecured" site and this will worry the folks who don't realize it's ok to view an unsecured weather page. Switching to https is just reassuring the casual viewer that he or she doesn't have to worry about all that in the first place. It's not a very complicated change, but you do have to pay a modest annual fee for a secure certificate. There are providers that will give you one for free, but you have to renew them every month or 90 days, rather than annually. GoDaddy would handle all that for you. I am curious as to what they are proposing to charge you for making the switch. The most recent release of Mark's SteelSeries Gauges, which I know you have on your website, makes the switch to https easy as far as the Gauges are concerned.

That's my 2˘ worth. Let us know how it turns out if you proceed, etc.

Here in northern Utah we are about to choke to death from the ash and smoke raining down from these very close wildfires so I trust your air smells a lot better than ours.
Blick


xairbusdriver

  • Storm
  • *****
  • Posts: 2196
    • EW7115 (E7115)
    • KTNGERMA20
    • Mid-South Weather
  • Station Details: Davis VP2 wireless + remote Anemometer/2014 Mac min - 10.13.4/WC 3.0
Re: Secured Weather Sites
« Reply #2 on: September 19, 2018, 08:56:23 PM »
In another part of web site upkeep, Google has become their indexing and ranking mobile designated sites first. If you build a responsive design, it shouldn't make any difference. If the site doesn't work well on small screens, your ranking will probably be lowered.

As for https, I've noticed that some domain and web providers are slowly moving to all the free certificate providers to be used and will do the updating for you automatically. You will usually pay for this "service" which is supposed to be fairly simple. I'm dragging my feet on the matter as I have so few visitors. However, Hosgator is now offering a free "https" service that automatically renews every 90 days. I might take them up on that even though I plan on moving to another web host when my current arrangement expires.

So far, no browsers are blocking viewers from plain http sites, they are simply showing different colored "favocons" or images on non-SSL sites.

elagache

  • Global Moderator
  • Storm
  • *****
  • Posts: 4999
    • DW3835
    • KCAORIND10
    • Canebas Weather
  • Station Details: Davis Vantage Pro-2, MacBook Pro (Early 2011), macOS 10.13.6, WeatherCat 3
I won't and sorry about the smoke (Re: Secured Weather Sites)
« Reply #3 on: September 19, 2018, 10:51:55 PM »
Dear Randall, Blick, X-Air, and WeatherCat web spinners,

Does anyone here have their weather site set up as secured?

My website is badly neglected as it is, but I'm certainly not going to bother with upgrading it to secure http.  As far as I'm concerned, Google and other companies are spinning some mass hysteria by marking websites as "not secure."  They web crawlers can determine if the website is capable of collecting any information from the user or not.  A website that only provides information for visitors should - not - be https.  It is simply wasting computing power for absolutely no benefit.

Here in northern Utah we are about to choke to death from the ash and smoke raining down from these very close wildfires so I trust your air smells a lot better than ours.

Not to hijack Randall's thread, but sorry you have such bad air quality.  At the moment California is in better shape, but we are fast approaching the "Santa Ana" season when the wildfires might come back with a vengeance.

Cheers, Edouard  [cheers1]