View Single Post
Old 04-17-2017, 09:51 PM   #8
BurntBulb
LiveLeaker
 
BurntBulb's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 16,681
BurntBulb is a forum GOD!!BurntBulb is a forum GOD!!BurntBulb is a forum GOD!!BurntBulb is a forum GOD!!BurntBulb is a forum GOD!!BurntBulb is a forum GOD!!BurntBulb is a forum GOD!!BurntBulb is a forum GOD!!BurntBulb is a forum GOD!!BurntBulb is a forum GOD!!BurntBulb is a forum GOD!!
Points: 189,382,041, Level: 100
Points: 189,382,041, Level: 100 Points: 189,382,041, Level: 100 Points: 189,382,041, Level: 100
Activity: 68%
Activity: 68% Activity: 68% Activity: 68%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zero-g View Post
well, you can't just make a protocol change itself, which is why they either create new ones that are more secure, or tunnel them within one that is.
That add on is a pretty handy way to check for and apply a secure connection for most people who wouldn't even know the difference between the two. This is something I think you'll likely find as a default action in most web browsers before too long.
that's the way I was thinking when I 1st saw this add-on.
How the F could it literally make a secure url?

I was actually thinking with this add-on somebody had done this!
Wouldn't surprise me if it did happen though.
After 35+ years in electronics and computers, I've learned never to say never. If somebody says it can't be done, there's 10 people out there trying to figure how to do just that.

With the exponential growth in programming and coding no one individual can keep up with it anymore. That's why we gave it up some years back, and just sub-contracted it out. Was faster, cheaper, and lot less stress on our middle-aged brains!
__________________
"The universal aptitude for ineptitude makes any human accomplishment an incredible miracle."
Col. J. Stapp
BurntBulb is offline   Reply With Quote