Gene Heskett wrote: > I have been considering switching to https. On the one hand it would be good ever all traffic used https. On the other hand it won't prevent someone from knowing what sites you visit or what visiters are visiting your site. All of your pages are publicly known anyway. Good to contribute to the https traffic though.
> No login will ever exist according to gene as I find the saving of > usernames and passwords on a per site basis, a quite major pain in the > ass. People who are interested in what I have to offer (a lot of horn > blowing by an old fart to be sure) should not be subjected to that > insanity. Then I am still of the mind that I would not worry about using https for it. For your use case keeping it simple is probably the better way to go. > And they can do that with much less effort if I don't use it. One of the > reasons my web page is a bit incomplete in re my hobbies. So I am much > more concerned with keeping visitors in a user permissions jail so they > cannot tour the rest of this machine. Help in that regard would be most > appreciated. That sounds like something that would be a good question to this list with potential for a good discussion that many people might share an interest. Putting services such as web servers into containers is becoming the best practice these days. There are many ways to do it. If you do please start a new discussion thread for it rather than diverting here. Bob
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
