As for SSL, I don’t see any reason to change http to https (with all the problems I’m experiencing on the addresses of people who have links to the site).
This site doesn’t have a data entry form, I don’t see why it should be https-ised.
In the field of privacy protection, it is a classic wrong answer that this one, because of a misunderstanding of the basic problem.
Even if we agree that Egyptology is not a subject that can do much damage or business, large groups and states do not need to know that those who go to your site are interested in it.
It is a first bulwark against mass surveillance and targeted advertising.
What will happen the day the government says that Egyptology is dangerous and inspires terrorists?
Access to knowledge, as a common good of humankind, is supposed to remain free; freedom of information is essential, and theoretically so, in all fields, including the sensitive ones.
That’s why the subject is so complicated; there can be a fine line between privacy and collective security.
Then I say that, but I’m just as schizophrenic about this as anyone else: I don’t think I absolutely have to go to HTTPS to look at science or history sites; I think it’s unlikely that knowing that I’m interested in these subjects will backfire on me; I may be wrong.
It’s up to each one to estimate this risk for himself… and in doubt, it’s probably very, very, very good to generalize HTTPS.
On the other hand, Google is promoting HTTPs, but let’s face it: for them it doesn’t change anything in their massive Data Collection through adsense or analytics for example.
They are not going to promote something that is against their own interests.
It doesn’t change anything for them, because you can surround your sheep with armor, the advertising and the traffic analysis are the wolves that are… already inside of the sheepfold
Modified by QuentinC (24 Mar 2017 – 08:38)