Matthew Flaschen, 03/10/2013 10:33:
On 10/02/2013 08:49 PM, Tim Starling wrote:
On 02/10/13 05:56, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
Yes, beta can't currently really be used unless you manually confirm
certificates. (Which, by the way, you should never do on any website.)
Why not? Self-signed certi
On 10/02/2013 08:49 PM, Tim Starling wrote:
On 02/10/13 05:56, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
Yes, beta can't currently really be used unless you manually confirm
certificates. (Which, by the way, you should never do on any website.)
Why not? Self-signed certificates are as secure as plain HTTP,
On 02/10/13 05:56, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
> Yes, beta can't currently really be used unless you manually confirm
> certificates. (Which, by the way, you should never do on any website.)
Why not? Self-signed certificates are as secure as plain HTTP, which
you would think would be good enough f
Chris McKenna, 01/10/2013 21:40:
Trying to access almost anything on en.wikipedia.beta.wmflabs.org using
https results in dire warnings from Firefox that the security
certificate is not valid.
Looking at the details it is issued to "*.wmflabs.org", which at least
as far as Firefox 24 on linux is
Trying to access almost anything on en.wikipedia.beta.wmflabs.org using
https results in dire warnings from Firefox that the security certificate
is not valid.
Looking at the details it is issued to "*.wmflabs.org", which at least as
far as Firefox 24 on linux is concerned doesn't seem to cove
