Re: Should login pages be protected by SSL?

[Amir Herzberg <herzbea () macs biu ac il>]

Saqib Ali wrote:
> Hello,
>
> In my opinion protecting the login using SSL is  a good idea, and I do
> it myself. However it does not prevent from phishing etc. A phishing
> site owner can easily get a SSL protected website as well.
I agree; however now this is a question of user awareness and of browser 
indicators of site identity and security. I agree, and even have done 
usability testing showing, that current browser UI provides inadequet 
indicators, definitely for most (naive) users. See paper in my site.
> I think a better approach is to use Netcraft Anti-Phishing toolbar <
> http://toolbar.netcraft.com/ >
I agree users should install (and be encouraged to install) a browser 
extension providing improved security and identification UI. As an 
open-source research project, we develop TrustBar, currently for FireFox 
and soon also for IE; I'll appreciate your opinion. Download at 
https://addons.mozilla.org/extensions/moreinfo.php?id=478.
> It clearly displays sites' hosting location, including country,
> helping you to evaluate fraudulent urls (e.g. the real citibank.com or
> barclays.co.uk sites are unlikely to be hosted in the former Soviet
> Union).
The problem is that they go to a centralized server for all this - 
privacy and performance concerns, imho...

TrustBar displays name/logo of site and of CA, and allows users to 
assign their own name/logo to the site (`petname`).

--
Best regards,

Amir Herzberg

Associate Professor
Department of Computer Science
Bar Ilan University
http://AmirHerzberg.com

New: see my Hall Of Shame of Unprotected Login pages: 
http://AmirHerzberg.com/shame.html