Hi, when I first read about this planned edit, I was critical too; I thought, "ah, another eager youngster wanting to make the world a more secure place by telling everyone else how they ought to conduct their business".
But if I haven't totally misunderstood this, then the proposal will only replace a http:// by a https:// pointer if the site operator himself has added that redirect in their web server configuration. So yes, the SSL certificate might be invalid or self-signed, but if the operator has configured his server to redirect everyone to that broken certificate then visiting the site with http will not improve your existence in any way. Had this suggested edit been "I'll simply try port 443 and if that's open I'll re-write the http URL to https" then it would of course not be acceptable. But I struggle to find any problems with the suggestion, other than my general reservation against any automated edit - it will make the object "look fresh" when indeed it hasn't been touched. In the worst case, an object might have a wrong web site URL, that points to the web site of something completely different, and this bot would happily edit the web site, still pointing to something completely different. But it wouldn't exactly worsen the situtation... Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
