https://letsencrypt.org/2016/06/22/ https-progress-june-2016

>>55668333
checked

>>55668886
so close

>>55668333
Yes, though I use Comodo since Let's Encrypt didn't exist when I first bought the certificate.

>almost half of the web is encrypted
>only 5m certs issued
>When we launched in December of 2015, 39.5% of page loads on the Web used HTTPS (as measured by Firefox Telemetry). By mid-April 2016 that number was up to 42% and today it stands at 45%.

it's nowhere near as much as "almost half of the web". It's more like "almost half of firefox's userbase loads only 45% of encrypted sites".

>>55668939
I wouldn't see the number being any different if we got google chrome telemetry or internet explorer/edge telemetry since all the major browsers have the lets encrypt root certificate.

>>55669171
If you're an XP user, you're basically forced to use Firefox, since Chrom/ium use the default Windows certificates, while Firefox comes with their own.

None of the sites that use Let's Encrypt won't work on my machine unless I use Firefox. Oh, and I've disabled the most (if not all) of the telemetry on Firefox.

just saying

>>55668333
i'm not going to fuck with https and risking valuable seo positions

but for my new sites sure I'm gonna implement it

>>55668333
yeah but i use wosign

>>55668333
No bad for a CIA outfit.

>>55669232
>XP user
Well to be honest you're opinion doesn't matter.

It's like saying you can't use high octane fuel because your Model-T is coal fired.

Update your shirt, even to Linux.

File: C__Data_Users_DefApps_AppData_INTERNETEXPLORER_Temp_Saved Images_1467892931020.gif (1001KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

1001KB, 640x480px

>>55669234
>valuable seo positions
Considering Google is the only engine that matters, you're only hurting your rankings since they rank HTTPS-enabled sites higher now.

>>55669345
i have traffic from yandex, yahoo and bing

>>55669232
I don't know if lets encrypt works in IE 8, but since you said you disabled most if not all telemetry, that means the number can be higher, much higher. IE and firefox are the only two major browsers that work with xp and vista still.

>>55669268
How the fuck would the CIA benefit from helping websites to have ssl?

>>55669443
I think he's referring to that the CIA could control the certificate and thus get to see all the traffic that they wouldn't be able to eavesdrop on. It could happen, but nothing has popped up so far.

>>55669365
SO basically you're a nobody

>he doesn't know that https is broken

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/05/nsa-gchq-encryption-codes-security

"The document reveals that the agency has capabilities against widely used online protocols, such as HTTPS, voice-over-IP and Secure Sockets Layer (SSL), used to protect online shopping and banking."