Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Endpoint

10/18/2018
10:30 AM
Tim Callan
Tim Callan
Commentary
Connect Directly
Twitter
LinkedIn
RSS
E-Mail vvv
50%
50%

Getting Up to Speed with "Always-On SSL"

Websites can avoid the negative consequences of a "not secure" label from Google Chrome 68 by following four AOSSL best practices.

On July 24, Google followed through on its announced plans to mark web pages that did not use HTTPS as "not secure" in Chrome. The Google Chrome 68 "not secure" warning occurs even on pages that don't share or collect any kind of confidential information. The sites labeled "not secure" by the world's most popular browser include those of large brands such as ESPN, Fox News, the NBA, and The Los Angeles Times. The consequences of a "not secure" label can be considerable. Negative trust indicators like this one can stifle use of websites by creating anxiety about their safety. This harmful effect can occur even if it is not a site where transactions take place.

In addition to loss of confidence and decreased transactions, the "not secure" warning can also damage a company's brand. A recent study by research firm DevOps reveals that 97% of active Internet users want to do business with companies that protect their confidential information, and 91% want to do business with companies that invest in best-of-breed security solutions. The presence of an Extended Validation (EV) certificate — or the recognizable "green bar," as it is known — improves consumer perception of a company's stability, level of customer service, and ability to meet its commitments, presumably because they see a clear signal that this company is investing in best-of-breed security solutions to protect its customers. The "not secure" warning has the opposite effect, strongly suggesting that this company is not investing in the best available website security or doing all it can do to protect users. When trust goes away, so does revenue.

Furthermore, distrusted certificates will no longer enable encryption, leaving any shared, sensitive data such as personally identifiable information, credit cards, logins, and personal health information (PHI) exposed to spying and theft.

The solution to Chrome's "not secure" warning is to implement Always-on SSL (AOSSL). AOSSL is the practice of securing all pages on a site with SSL regardless of whether or not they include forms, logins, the ability to make purchases, or the sharing of confidential information. Companies have been perfecting the AOSSL process for the past decade, and today AOSSL can be effective, reliable, easy to implement and maintain, and cost-efficient.

When implementing AOSSL for online properties, these best practices allow for optimal results:

  • Be sure to include EV SSL certificates on your public-facing pages for the highest visitor confidence and maximum transaction rates. In particular, use EV SSL on all pages on which you ask a visitor to purchase, open or login to an account, fill out and submit forms, or share sensitive information.
  • Include a trust seal on your public-facing pages for extra assurance.
  • Apply Domain Validation (DV) certificates on non-public-facing pages for greater cost efficiency without reduction in trust.
  • Use two-year certificates to minimize management overhead and the risk of outage.

Web security has always served two customers. It provides protection not only for the businesses that operate sites but also for the customers, partners, and employees who use them. This second group is critical to the success of any business site, and the level of trust they can maintain goes a long way in determining the success of these sites. All businesses from big to small should make sure they're adopting AOSSL to inspire the greatest confidence possible and keep those revenue numbers going in the right direction.

Related Content:

 

Black Hat Europe returns to London Dec 3-6 2018  with hands-on technical Trainings, cutting-edge Briefings, Arsenal open-source tool demonstrations, top-tier security solutions and service providers in the Business Hall. Click for information on the conference and to register.

Senior Fellow Tim Callan contributes to Sectigo's standards and practices, industry relations, product roadmap, and go-to-market strategy. A founding member of the CA/Browser Forum, Tim has more than 20 years of experience as a product and strategic marketing leader for ... View Full Bio
Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Brandnic Brand Names
50%
50%
Brandnic Brand Names,
User Rank: Apprentice
11/12/2019 | 4:41:20 PM
Website
Thanks for sharing a great article. Indeed SSL is one the top factor for Google to acknowledge website credibility.
tychotithonus
100%
0%
tychotithonus,
User Rank: Strategist
10/18/2018 | 2:54:45 PM
a counterpoint about EV certs
Great article overall - just one nuance that I'd differ with.

Extended Validation (EV) certificates are probably not needed in most cases. Large-scale UX analysis by the Google team and by researchers have repeatedly demonstrated that users do not notice or care about the additional browser feedback.

https://scotthelme.co.uk/are-ev-certificates-worth-the-paper-theyre-written-on/

https://www.troyhunt.com/extended-validation-certificates-are-dead/
SOC 2s & Third-Party Assessments: How to Prevent Them from Being Used in a Data Breach Lawsuit
Beth Burgin Waller, Chair, Cybersecurity & Data Privacy Practice , Woods Rogers PLC,  12/5/2019
Navigating Security in the Cloud
Diya Jolly, Chief Product Officer, Okta,  12/4/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win a Starbucks Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: "This is the last time we hire Game of Thrones Security"
Current Issue
Navigating the Deluge of Security Data
In this Tech Digest, Dark Reading shares the experiences of some top security practitioners as they navigate volumes of security data. We examine some examples of how enterprises can cull this data to find the clues they need.
Flash Poll
Rethinking Enterprise Data Defense
Rethinking Enterprise Data Defense
Frustrated with recurring intrusions and breaches, cybersecurity professionals are questioning some of the industrys conventional wisdom. Heres a look at what theyre thinking about.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2019-4428
PUBLISHED: 2019-12-09
IBM Watson Assistant for IBM Cloud Pak for Data 1.0.0 through 1.3.0 is vulnerable to cross-site scripting. This vulnerability allows users to embed arbitrary JavaScript code in the Web UI thus altering the intended functionality potentially leading to credentials disclosure within a trusted session....
CVE-2019-4611
PUBLISHED: 2019-12-09
IBM Planning Analytics 2.0 is vulnerable to cross-site scripting. This vulnerability allows users to embed arbitrary JavaScript code in the Web UI thus altering the intended functionality potentially leading to credentials disclosure within a trusted session. IBM X-Force ID: 168519.
CVE-2019-4612
PUBLISHED: 2019-12-09
IBM Planning Analytics 2.0 is vulnerable to malicious file upload in the My Account Portal. Attackers can make use of this weakness and upload malicious executable files into the system and it can be sent to victim for performing further attacks. IBM X-Force ID: 168523.
CVE-2019-4621
PUBLISHED: 2019-12-09
IBM DataPower Gateway 7.6.0.0-7 throug 6.0.14 and 2018.4.1.0 through 2018.4.1.5 have a default administrator account that is enabled if the IPMI LAN channel is enabled. A remote attacker could use this account to gain unauthorised access to the BMC. IBM X-Force ID: 168883.
CVE-2019-19230
PUBLISHED: 2019-12-09
An unsafe deserialization vulnerability exists in CA Release Automation (Nolio) 6.6 with the DataManagement component that can allow a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code.