Google Chrome Is Ditching This Feature

[@DINO92AVFC]

I would actually argue that the opposite would be better: have no lock if site is encrypted, but have red crossed-out lock in case the site is unencrypted. That way people won't have anything that would make them think the site is legit, but if the site is unencrypted they'd see the warning.

[@Tupsuu]

Maybe they will still keep the red lock

[@anonded]

Yeah, they should go through with the change and have a tune icon. But as the oc said, should also have a red crossed out lock if the site is unencrypted. TLDR: keep the tune icon but also have a crossed lock for HTTP.

They will still warn about sites that don't use HTTPS or are using an untrusted or invalid certificate

[@hubertnnn]

They used to have 2 types of locks: a grey one that marks a site as using encryption and a green one that meant its safe to use. Everyone could get the gray one, while the green one was reserved to banks and people willing to pay millions of dollars for that green padlock. But for some unknown to me reason they removed the green padlock.

[@FunkyJeff22]

"There's no red lock? Must be a trustworthy site"

[@giga-chicken]

I would think the best solution here would be to remove the lock icon for https, but leave the unsecure icon for http and certificate errors, that way technical people would still be able to see at a glance whether the certificate passed, and non-technical people don't have a confusing lock icon.

[@n6rt9s]

I think they will do that.

[@Lolp821]

They likely have an ulterior motive here, probably to include something in that menu at some point. This decision seems strange and not thought out well which is always suspect.

[@mxdanger]

Buddy that’s exactly what they’re doing. Now users won’t have a false sense of security and the sites that are http and invalid certificates will have a very prominent warning.

[@Ozymandias1]

Many websites that are legit don’t have certificates as they don’t collect private information. It’s rather cumbersome and expensive to use them on e.g. the site of a local bake shop that doesn’t require visitors to login.

[@stonebubbleprivat]

@@Ozymandias1 That's false. SSL-certificates are completely free of charge. In addition, it is dangerous to not use one like they mentioned in the video. You can insert malecious content into http packets

[@kwerboom]

Mozilla had similar points when it made changes to how it handled the padlock icon in Firefox 70. They decided to change it from green to gray for HTTPS and have a red line through it for plain HTTP. They had a write up where the two listed reasons for removing the green color were because 80% of the web is HTTPS and they wanted to de-emphasize the prominence of the icon itself.

[@jonathanscherer8567]

Still the best browser.

[@MizManFryingP]

Google usually makes bad decisions but as a web developer I 100% get behind this change. The lock icon creates a false sense of security and authenticity to a website when in reality getting one is completely free and easy with tools like Let's Encrypt

[@gFamWeb]

I disagree, I think it's an issue of poor user education.

[@BrotherCheng]

@@gFamWeb Well, you can't force users to read documentation. The way to fix the user education is by using more intuitive icons like this Chrome change to basically normalize HTTPS, and communicates that HTTPS is the norm, but lack of it is usually a little fishy in today's web.

[@silvahawk]

So now instead of looking at a website icon to at least get an idea of how safe it is, they make us click on the icon to check for every single site, then also confirm in the URL that there's no freaking @....zip. So intuitive 🙃

[@88porpoise]

​@@gFamWeb You need to design your UI to meet your users' needs. You cannot design your users to fit your UI.

[@0106johnny]

Yeah, the lock is meaningless unless you actually look at the certificate chain.

[@trimonmusic]

Web developer here, I absolutely agree with the change. The padlock was good for encouraging us devs to implement HTTPS, but it wasn’t communicated properly to end users. I personally know multiple people who have fallen victim to scams, particularly phishing scams spread by text, under the false impressions that the phoney website they visited was legitimate thanks to the padlock. They were blissfully unaware that the padlock only ensured their data would be safely delivered to the criminals operating the site.

[@jimktrains0]

There are levels of verification that could (have) been used. For instance to get extended verification certs the issuer would verify contact information, physical addresses, &c along with the ownership of the domain. That could be better than giving no feedback, but i don't believe they're as heavily used anymore and the differences and distinctions were never conveyed to end users well.

[@llynxfyre]

Even my finances class at school peddled the idea that https is a key indicator that a shopping site is safe to use. Glad they're now doing more to clear up the confusion for end users.

[@soundspark]

That last point should be a good reason that CAs including Let's Encrypt and Cloudflare should be revoking certificates used for malicious purposes.

[@iagmusicandflying]

While I agree this is a huge problem and something should be done, I don't think this is the right fix. Now we expect users to click on something just to see the lock that they clearly don't understand in the first place?

[@Lolp821]

The only thing I have to say to those people is to learn what these things are, not to change the world to suit those people who didn't. This is the mainstream non-tech people negatively affecting everyone else, pretty tired of this to be honest.

[@JordanPlayz158]

0:17 "This indicates that the site you're on is using HTTPS" That is only partially true, there is the additional requirement of using certificate from a trusted CA, you can still use HTTPS with your own self-signed certs and it won't show the green padlock so it is improper to say what they said in the video, I can understand though as this is simpler to say than what I explained

[@thatanimeweirdo]

In the days of Let's Encrypt, it's as easy as entering two Terminal commands to get a trusted CA certificate though. The main issue still exists, that normal users associate the lock with a "secure website" rather than a "secure connection"

[@0106johnny]

Since certificates from trusted CAs don't have any requirements anymore it is basically the same

[@thatanimeweirdo]

To those suggesting a crossed out lock for HTTP connections: Chromium browsers do already display a "Not Secure" tag next to the URL for those pages since 2018.

[@HarryTurney]

Yeah and it's very clear. The lock just isn't needed here.

[@taiiat0]

and not to sound mean, but the People 'bringing that up' and thinking they've found a loophole or problem - sorry fam, you're the exact demographic that this change is needed for. you don't understand how things work currently as is, and are misinterpreting the visual information being presented. exactly confirming that this change IS for the better!

[@Greenleaf_]

@@taiiat0 Who are you talking to?

[@asandax6]

​@@taiiat0 You mean the people that want things to stay the way they are which is simple and easy to understand should not be complaining about a change that's going to make things more confusing?

[@taiiat0]

​@@asandax6 it's not going to make anything more confusing, you're just not fully briefed on what is or isn't changing.

[@remghoost]

Oddly enough, I literally just learned about this about 3 days ago while setting up my first home hosted, internet-facing server. It's literally 3 commands on Linux to get an SSL cert for a server. Granted, HTTPS is a solid thing and should be used by every site, but I've found a lot of people (myself included) weren't exactly aware of what that lock icon meant.

[@Lost-In-Blank]

It was also grossly irresponsible when we used to claim that HTTPS does anything to ensure that the website you are on is the website you want to be on. Typosquatting and Domain spoofing both easily defeat any assurance HTTPS used to provide years ago. The only thing HTTPS does is encrypt traffic between your browser and whatever-the-heck server you happen to be connected to.

[@Alexandremix]

I'm surprised that it took this long to change this . Scammers were using this as an advantage. They would often even tell their victims to see if the lock is green to make them really think they are completely secure.

[@jimmydandy9364]

That won't deter scammers, they will just embed those security certificates on their web sites. Ponzi sites have done it for years, sites flashing their "EV Certificate", Comodo, verified by wave, etc, and when you did due diligence they did have EV......SO yeah all these certificates are pretty much fucking useless - scammers have the upper hand now.

[@Animatron11]

No amount of changes will fix uneducated ignorant humans who fall for easy scams, you can tell them anything and they will believe.

[@Midcon77]

Gotta admit consider myself pretty tech savvy (build my computers, do the occasional coding, have built and hosted websites (but years ago), etc.) and I learned something new here. I guess it just didn't dawn on me that the lock indicated the transmission was encrypted, not the site itself. Good to know, and I'm glad I learned something new!

[@MaximNightFury]

I say having the settings icon makes sense there since Chrome already puts site-specific settings there as well. There should be a crossed out lock icon though if the certificate doesn't pass or it's HTTP at least.

[@michawhite7613]

That's their plan

[@gsdtxz]

i am suprised that you can't see your dad but i can see my immatureness

[@martin0499]

It already says "Not secure", if connection is http

[@MaximNightFury]

@@martin0499 Well yeah, and I hope they keep doing something like that

[@LuisMan123]

​@@gsdtxzyou're definitely 13

[@Focusbreak-Habeeb]

Team Firefox here!

[@_GhostMiner]

Hello 👋

[@markusTegelane]

sup m8

[@AakashKumar-tn6yh]

Hey daddy

[@DryPaperHammerBro]

Wotcher, m8

[@TheGlitchyMario]

Firefox ftw

[@MaskOfCinder]

3:39 On Firefox that new icon is already visible for KZbin's url. Interestingly the padlock icon is still there next to the new icon. If you click the new icon you see the permissions you allowed or disabled for the website.

[@Breigner01]

Honestly as a software dev, I have deployed a website and it takes at most 30mins to setup https and make it work indefinitely. It's just a matter of running a script and enabling the auto renew (the configuration is what takes most of the time). So yeah I understand why they change that if users think it makes a site legit.

[@MrRollmoreBlunts]

The Lockpicking Lawyer has picked the Padlock in his Browser. Twice, to prove it was not a fluke.

[@mfaizsyahmi]

Watching on Firefox rn, and interestingly it has both the padlock and the slider icons. (plus a shield icon too!)

[@misterieping1307]

From what I experienced (with people I encounter), that 11% figure is overly generous. Most people I know don't know what the padlock means, let alone HTTPS.

[@dk14929]

I had a similar thought. Turns out they got their survey respondents from Clickworker. According to Clickworker's own site: “Our community now includes more than 4.5 million internet-savvy people from all over the world, our so-called Clickworkers.” Obviously this is marketing fluff, but I'd still guess that these people probably are a bit more Internet savvy than the average Chrome user

[@TheAmethystAurora]

Firefox'll probably follow suit with this, because most people who use Firefox are switching from a different browser (which is mostly Chrome because it's the most popular) like with ftp support. Although, Firefox already uses that icon (right next to the lock, in fact!) but could just incorporate them into one icon.

[@sp4c33]

Firefox already have the same icon, but they still have a padlock icon for cert info. Switched from Chrome, cuz they went too far with shady things... Khm, khm softwarereportertool.exe, am I right google. They messed up KZbin too, dislike button, no option to choose video codec, etc.

[@thebpphantom]

@@sp4c33 Keep that padlock or we'll just use extensions to check cert validity and show it instead.

[@U1TR4F0RCE]

Pretty sure at this point in time people have mostly finished switching off Firefox, I know personally I mostly use Firefox but use non-google chromium based stuff when I really need to use a specific extension or for trying out web app stuff.

[@hubertnnn]

@@U1TR4F0RCE There are still people who use Firefox even though Mozilla is hard trying to make us switch to Chrome. Even after recent changes where Firefox devtools became buggy as hell they are still better than Chrome's. Only a little better though.

[@snintendog]

@@hubertnnn Been using FIrefox forks that say "X feature is retarded here is a toggle to turn it on if you want it otherwise old v14 UI"

[@flamingscar5263]

Honestly good change, the lock was always a good idea on paper, but as said in the video many people thought lock = safe so getting rid of it may help stop some scams

[@iamShorteh]

Uneducated users don't make a feature bad, they (google) could have done a campaign to clear up what HTTPS is instead, for the general public. Now they're obfuscating the icon and hiding it behind another menu. HTTPS doesn't mean "you're secure", it means "your communication is secure".

[@hammerth1421]

The new tune icon closely resembles a very similar UI element in Firefox. Just so you know who actually did the design work of your browser...

[@snintendog]

been ther since version 40 next to the padlock.

[@SNTrepie]

It wasn't too long ago that Chrome added "Always use secure connections" in the settings. Something they were curiously late in doing too. Firefox had that option for a while. I think Edge even had it before Chrome.

[@benji-menji]

The slider will be good because a user will be put in a menu where they can set permissions. Still wish there is an easy way to see what security a site has.

[@iggysixx]

As a designer (logos / icons / ux / corporate guidelines / web / etc), I understand the reasoning. HOWEVER, this icon is not inviting interaction, has little connection to anything 'safety' related. It COULD be(come) an ok icon for a 'settings' menu, as a representation of "here is where you turn things on/off" (even though the detached lines do not clearly visualize 'sliders'). A shield of some kind would have been more appropriate (even though that would pose a similar issue as a lock - "oh a shield.. So it's safe!") . Maybe simply a shield with a question mark on it - "is this site safe? Check here and judge for yourself / protect your privacy by adjusting settings" . Or a shield with a lower case i, (as used in almost all public transport / airports' to signify "information" or the retrieval thereof).. It's amazing to me that Google's visual design language is so clear in some ways, yet hopelessly unclear in others... The menus on Android... Dear lord... Black links black text black titles (and no clear visual distinction between them; links are almost identical to small headings, etc.. The line spacing / whitespace used to help, but no longer... Oh, and the options for typography and layout: very limited and 'boxed in' to accomodate those smooth transitions when you interact with something. The list goes on... I sincerely dislike the 'design language', and perhaps more so: the effect that it has on apps and websites I have to work with..

[@Cheerybelle]

I *think* they're going for a general "site settings" menu icon rather than a "site security (info/settings)" menu icon, even if it does house information about the site's security from that menu. I personally read it as a potential settings button immediately just from the dots and horizontal lines, but I can see how ambiguous it could potentially come across as to others.

[@jotch_7627]

the point is to *avoid* connotations with safety, because HTTPS does not make a site safe. it is a small technical detail that protects one tiny area of your interaction with this specific server, but that was never communicated to users. now everyone thinks that padlock makes a site safe, so we need to do our best to change how people think about safety. it will absolutely still warn you when HTTPS isnt being used, which does actually impact safety

[@iggysixx]

@@Cheerybelle For me, personally, that icon is exactly my issue with their whole framework. For you (perhaps you're more used to Android?) it's recognizable as such - Maybe because the icon represents something in the most recent Android menus...? Or simply because you process visual information differently, and it just 'makes sense'? For me, it's extremely helpful to have colors involved in menus and in text (even if only 1 "call to action" color, or "this is ON" color). Button shapes also help; as do sliders where I can see the track (so i can immediately see if it's on/off) But the menu does not feel like a menu to me anymore, (if you know what I mean) Google has minimalized everything beyond usefulness. If the difference between icons that are OFF/ON is 20% Grey / 50% Grey... Or if only the subtitle text changes when I click on a menu item (like in the YT app settings on iOS)... I don't easily see that something is active or that something has changed. Like, it's harder for me to discern information from this type of UI. What I'm trying to say is: "this icon might not be logical to ME, because I don't find the menu style logical either" It's been minimalized beyond usefulness - makes sense the icon is useless for me too ;)

[@iggysixx]

@@jotch_7627 I understand the need to avoid connotations with 'safety' as an iconographic statement; A lock means 'safe'. A shield means 'protected'. But does that mean ANY hint to 'find those type of settings here' must be annihilated? My point is that things like the magnifying glass, the 'cast to screen' icon, even the hamburger / meatballs / kebab menu icons - (someone needs to feed those devs, btw)... They all make sense (as does the paper airplane icon next to this textbox ->). They represent either the functionality (search = magnifying glass.. like an old timey detective) or which type of navigation you'll find underneath (hamburger = pulldown-esque list menu). This icon, however, looks to be more of a minimalist version of the 'translate' icon.... To me, that is. Or even a chat dialogue (person 1 speaks, person 2 replies. Perhaps with a bounding box, so I can SEE it's probably a slider. Or if the circle to the right ("ON") was filled in, and the circle to the left ("OFF") was more of a thin outline. That way it would have more of a connotation with an options menu, without deviating from the style. But that's my issue with the framework, most of the time. A lot of things are simplified too much - (to where they are no longer recognizable as the thing they should signify) - for the sake of a 'universal' / non-emotive / non-intrusive design framework. (Which I understand.. Edge, Opera, Chrome itself all run on the framework, and all have their own style. But to me that's still no excuse to make icons less readable - that kind of defies what icons were invented for in the first place; the ability to quickly navigate (be it a physical location or just information) This icon is for a browser in 2023, that won't be able to run on devices with 320x240 resolution... know what I mean? There is some room for a thin line for the sake of clarity, I should think. And a solid shape here or there to make line drawn icons easier to understand - that seems like a sacrifice well worth it. -- PS. I must give credits in other areas to Google: the new personal data / advertising / privacy menu: aaaamazing. For real. Clear differentiation between the different main menu items and sub items. Clear interface. (even icons, I believe - which makes it hella easier for me to locate what I'm looking for)

[@stevethepocket]

@@iggysixx Isn't their new privacy menu just "There are no options. We own your soul. You cannot disable this."?

[@insu_na]

What is wrong with people's brains that they associate a "Lock" icon with "Trustworthy"? When they walk through a city and see a bike that's locked to a lamp post, do they think to themselves "Man, that bike looks mighty trustworthy!" ?

[@jacksoncremean1664]

Because many people, especially those that know a little bit about tech love to shit on big tech companies for the sake of it. Yes, Big Tech is scummy, but the actually scummy things are never criticized.

[@joebot86]

Because a lot of effort was put into making "Lock means trustworthy" with web browsers as an oversimplification.

[@proceph]

plus, the job of an icon is to convey or represent something, right? for example if one comes across a globe, their brain automatically wouldn't associate it with a browser, as opposed to when seeing the representation of said globe as an icon on a computer/phone

[@parabolicpanorama]

"gee why would people associate it with meaning the site is secure when it says that next to it. clearly it means the connection between me and the site is secure because everyone learnt the OSI model."

[@insu_na]

@@parabolicpanorama the site *is* "secure" when it has the lock, it just isn't necessarily trustworthy. And again: what about a *lock* conveys trustworthiness?

[@cahyo77]

1:30 if you are staying at the airport i think you will have time. while waiting for security to kick him out 😂

[@sarah1390]

Firefox is already using the symbol that google is going to be implementing along with the lock and a shield if you have no-tracking enabled.

[@speedracer2please]

Just because you mentioned those car warranty scam calls, I recently got one claiming to be from the Department of Homeland Security. It even spoofed their actual number. Always call back the real number before giving any info, just to be sure!

[@flameshana9]

It's 2023 and the number you see can still be faked. It shouldn't work like that. A connection FROM a number should be the exact same as TO the number. That way it couldn't be faked. But of course protecting people from scams would mean making less money from the scammers.

[@stevethepocket]

@@flameshana9 And scam calls is literally the only way landline phone providers make any money anymore, so they _really_ have a good reason to keep letting them through. This is exactly why we should have nationalized our telecom infrastructure ages ago instead of breaking it up.

[@sorrynotsorry8224]

I wonder if we'll ever get a SHTTP protocol. FTP has FTPS and SFTP where the S prefix indicates SSH. Generally even more secure (which is what the first S in SSH stands for).

[@David_Crayford]

Might not work as it looks like SHIT

[@InventorZahran]

That sounds like "shit TP" when I read it aloud...

[@mihailmojsoski4202]

probably never because it HTTP over SSH makes 0 sense

[@sorrynotsorry8224]

@@mihailmojsoski4202 For most of the internet, sure. But imagine you want to login to a website. Instead of using a username or password, you can just let SSH keys handle it. You've just removed the weakest link out of a login.

[@gFamWeb]

Maybe its because I'm a developer, but I feel like the misunderstanding of the lock icon is down to poor user education.

[@0106johnny]

If you need to "educate" an everyday user it's poor ux design

[@snintendog]

@@0106johnny "what is this Square thingy?... Save why not make it a pen and paper sonny?"

[@gFamWeb]

​@@0106johnny if we went by that logic no one could make anything new. They'd just have to make stuff that people already understand from other stuff.

[@0106johnny]

@@gFamWeb You can also make intuitive ux

[@lande.r1]

I like the new setting to block specific site permission, not everyone digs on their settings as we often do

[@Jamman1403]

Always been a thing? You just havent seen it

[@-JackER]

not new at all.

[@snintendog]

Mmm early 2000's firefox feature. Took them long enough to show it to the normies.

[@Gramini]

@@snintendog Those settings have been there for a very long time as well…

[@stevensavoie856]

According to the image, clicking the icon still reveals a lock icon that tells the user something they'll almost always misinterpret: The connection is secure. Good thing they aren't leaving scammers completely screwed with this update. That would be unfair.

[@00001Htheprogrammer]

Well, that clearly says *connection* is secure, not *site* is secure. And if people can still misinterpret that, well, I guess we need to reeducate the users.

[@stevensavoie856]

@@00001Htheprogrammer yes, it's extremely clear to you and I. Some people don't know what the word connection includes, neither what Secure includes (though the answer to that one is "the connection"). They just get the impression that they are connected to something secure and the browser seems to think that they shouldn't be concerned. As for educating users.. it's a tough task. Very tough. The best we could possibly do is have something pop up on every browser, including old ones, and hope the user hasn't trained themselves to ignore it. Thankfully, hiding it is a step in the right direction. But the event viewer on windows is pretty hidden but scammers still use it to trick people.

[@00001Htheprogrammer]

@@stevensavoie856 Yup. They probably should reword it as “connection is encrypted”. Unless some people still believe that encrypted = safe…

[@stevensavoie856]

@@00001Htheprogrammer either way, it's a big improvement. The argument "people don't know what that actually means " doesn't work here because people don't know what "secure" means either.

[@Keffa15]

Google it self actually ruined the function of the padlock. Site using EV certificates (like banks etc...) Used to have there full company name aswell as a green background to indicate the certificate was validated to belong to the company. If the company name did not match what you where looking for you would know it was not right. Google made the change NOT to show this information anymore making it hard to spot phising sites as any website can have a signed certificate for free with lets encrypt...

[@jordanwardle11]

It's because it didn't work anyway. People are stupid. The only way for that to be effective is for blocking any site that doesn't have an ev certificate and then the scammers would just get that

[@teh-maxh]

Because EV certs were ridiculous.

[@snintendog]

@@teh-maxh only if your an indian scammer

[@Keffa15]

@@teh-maxh please tell me why you think EV certificates are ridiculous.

[@dk14929]

Phishing sites can easily spoof the organization name. Look up “Extended Validation Certificates are (Really, Really) Dead” by Troy Hunt

[@calingligore]

Non developers and non technical people are against this change. It’s funny that they are the people that will benefit from this the most

[@patrickang7739]

This is a good move, the padlock gives friends of mine who are not as technical a false sense of security more often than not.

[@asandax6]

But how is not having a lock going to raise their concerns because every other site is also not going to have it? It makes zero difference

[@patrickang7739]

At least, they won't be 🔒 = website good. There will be a new symbol replacing that lock and if they are curious as to why there's no longer a 🔒on their websites, they would probably try clicking that new symbol and learning from what's shown there instead.

[@lonesimba]

I think this lock icon is less informative nowdays, since you can get yourself a free Let's Encrypt certificate. If people really rely on icon = safe, then they're in for a bad surprise

[@kymotsujason]

Tbf, users are very stupid so this is probably a good change. Always remember the golden rule when developing UI: "The users are stupid."

[@stevethepocket]

More like: "The users weren't born knowing how to use your product, but as the person who designed it, you basically were, so you're the last person on the planet who can be trusted to judge how intuitive it actually is."

[@kymotsujason]

@@stevethepocket True, but the avg user is very stupid. I say this from my experience in IT. My first instinct has become pebkac because you cannot trust the user.

[@stevethepocket]

@@kymotsujason The problem with this approach is that it leads to resentment and a disinclination to make things more user-friendly because "Why should I _help_ the idiots who are only making the planet dumber by their very existence?"

[@kymotsujason]

@@stevethepocket Maybe for some people, but for me this just means things like making sure the first and second lines of an email are the most important or sending a step by step guide with images, arrows, and red boxes. In my mind, it is a “they’re stupid so treat them as though they need babying at every step.”

[@Respectable_Username]

Great explanations James! Would love for you to do a similar video on VPNs if you haven't already because their privacy claims annoy me so much! For normal use they provide almost no privacy benefit over HTTPS, and would love to see if users get a similar false sense of security using a VPN as they do from that lock icon

[@MinimumViablePicnic]

Really interesting, would like to hear more about the research mentioned

[@dk14929]

They actually published a paper: “It builds trust with the customers” - Exploring User Perceptions of the Padlock Icon in Browser UI

[@WraithAllen]

The "always use secure connections" setting in Security essentially forces the use of HTTPS... so set it to "on" and never turn it off.

[@ClellBiggs]

Google: Hey, I have a great idea! Let's create websites with a zip domain and remove the lock from HTTPS. I'm sure nothing will go wrong.

[@stokbrood]

Removing the lock is actually a good idea, as mentioned in the video.

[@wnsjimbo2863]

@@stokbrood its a shitty idea , now most ppl wont notice the website is not secure and they can give their credentials

[@samdbage9434]

​@@wnsjimbo2863 nowadays SSL is cheap. Even https sites can get your data as they've the key. People just assume the sites is legit/thrustworthy with the lock icon, but scam / any malicious sites can have https. Getting rid of the icon is good. That doesnt mean chrome will not inform you when the sites is using https or not

[@0106johnny]

​@@wnsjimbo2863 Http sites literally have big warnings. Even more obvious than before actually

[@snintendog]

@@samdbage9434 doing more harm than good there already is a solution but chromes Retarded UI made by dumbasses that got their job by being rich AF dont like using the Whitelisted Domains list in EV.

[@milnertechnologies9556]

3:12 no the other 89% have never noticed the lock so when you ask them they make something up and say it means it's trustworthy

[@i.lostblur]

i like this change. especially since it will make per site configuration accessible within 1 click instead of going to settings and searching for it then poking around with multiple toggles

[@ragtop63]

Wait, you mean to tell me the majority of people who use the internet have no idea what they’re doing? Shocker

[@MozartTheGOAT]

Honestly I just don't understand the hype around Google Chrome when there are so many better alternatives (Opera, Firefox)

[@Tupsuu]

It's just faster and cleaner and incorporates well into the google ecosystem.

[@snintendog]

@@Tupsuu except none of that is true.

[@mihailmojsoski4202]

​@@snintendogFirefox is literally just slower than Chrome because of its Javascript engine. And current Opera is based on Chrome for that specific reason.

[@Gramini]

@@mihailmojsoski4202 Opera is *not* based on Chrome. It's based on Chromium. They just share a common base.

[@Veerorith]

1:12 ignoring all the technical talk, that is one cute lil puppy.

[@_GhostMiner]

"odds are you use chrome" Well, Sir, you are wrong

[@Tupsuu]

Well sir. The odds were not in your favor.

[@xAjido]

You guys ever think of mixing up ad placements? They're so predictable I automatically know when to click ahead and how far.

[@smashed_penguin]

I'm actually with Google on this one, mainly because of all that was mentioned in the later half of the video.

[@m2pt5]

Firefox already has that icon in the address bar, alongside the lock icon. It pulls up any "additional permissions" you've given a website.

[@3_pancakes767]

Changing an icon doesn't seem like ditching a feature...

[@soundspark]

And it still shows a warning if HTTPS isn't being used.

[@MikeHarris1984]

This is good... because they already put all the settings there and I use it very frequently... Changing the ICON is good. But what about EV certs, where the icon says the name of the company and highlights in GREEN ussually. These are ussually banks and other highly important sites as the EV certs cost thousands per year for a single cert. But they are also insured by the issuer should any damage come to your brand/data/etc through malicious use of a signed cert.

[@Tupsuu]

I bet they will still show that. But there will only be the settings icon for normal https sites.

[@siddharthapal6915]

Honestly, I think the lock symbol shouldn't go away but the slider looking symbol should be a default option which automatically gets enabled after the update. The lock symbol should be an option which you can turn on cause those 11% people who do know that HTTPS means an encrypted transmission would not be lured into a false sense of security but it would make it convenient as you would know wether the site is using HTTPS without clicking on the symbol. I think that those people who can judge wether a site is safe or not would like the old symbol as it would save time. I don't think I would like to click on the symbol everytime I want to check wether the site is encrypted or not. I visit a lot of unknown websites both HTTPS and HTTP and l also download data off of them. It has kinda made me make sure that everytime I go to a unknown website, I should be sure wether the site is safe. For example: I made it so that everytime my microphone/camera is active, it would make a indicator turn on, I would scan anything I download which is not a png/jpeg/gif/txt/doc/pdf/epub/etc(any file format like exe which can make system changes) and I always use false information on internet so if my data is stolen, I am not harmed and I would know what website did it by the false information which was compromised. My system is also isolated and completely analog (to the point it doesn’t even have i/o ports as it is too old school) so it will be difficult for a virus to infect and even if it does, it will have to figure out my highly unusual system. I have also set up way too many recovery options so something like data corruption or data encryption does nothing. And virus which rely on internet connection or send data to the attacker are also dead as my motherboard doesn’t even support internet so it can't even send data (I purposely downloaded an program with a virus which steals data and attempts to use my system resources as for crypto-mining, it is fun to see the virus on the task manager opening a hidden chrome tab and desperately trying to crypto-mine on a gpuless and potato pc with no connection and I get to use a honestly awesome program).

[@Marc_Fuchs_1985]

Nope, I better don't give Google an even bigger market share in my life, than it has now by using Chrome. I am loyally sticking to Firefox, and while I do absolutely realize, it's got the worse performance compared to Chrome and Edge, I really don't want to send all my browsing data through a browser owned by huge corporations, which are known to try everything they can to get user data.

[@dylanloo9856]

Can't believe that a whole 4min video is dedicated to just changing this small lock icon, but is still surprisingly informative.

[@3Lv6engine]

very good choice from google, but the title kinda makes it seem like theyre doing smth bad guys

[@SPPR89]

The title is confusing, I thought google really gonna remove a feature that is useful but it turns out google will just change a icon.

[@3Lv6engine]

@@SPPR89 same

[@OrigEntertainmentOfficial]

Since you are asking for topics at the end, you should cover measures that we can take to protect senior citizen family members from phishing, malware, and outright scams. My mother in law was nearly taken advantage of but some good samaritans prevented her from depositing money in a bitcoin machine to a scammer.

[@xXmlgamingXx355]

I’m so glad I switched to Firefox

[@Tupsuu]

Firefox will follow google on this 100%

[@0106johnny]

​@@Tupsuu Yup, this has been requested for at least two years now

[@BaldrsFate]

"I don't use chromium based browsers cause it has tracking" - from people that uses cell phones

[@Amfibios]

"i use firefox because it's open source and doesn't track you" - fires up google maps and sets a destination

[@BaldrsFate]

Firefox uses the Google search page as its homepage and default search engine.

[@ktheveg]

I thought he was about to talk about the drop of Manifest V2 extensions in chrome. I'm glad it isn't This change I'm actually supportive of. I think this makes things a lot better for the end-user, especially the general less tech-knowledgable population who mistake the lock. Good change

[@fluffls]

Damn the LTT clickbait is just getting worse, a video about a UI icon change, but making it seem like they’re getting rid of HTTPS??

[@flamingscar5263]

How does it make it seem that way? Google doesn't even have the power to do that

[@SkooBalls]

@@flamingscar5263 I dont know maybe the title "Google Chrome Is Ditching This Feature"

[@snintendog]

@@SkooBalls except they are for their retarded UI philosophy.

[@hlo695]

I looked up on my Firefox browser, and there it is: the lines and circles icon with the functionality you described. I wonder how long it's been there...

[@Acceleronics]

Now that Google has replaced (or maybe joined?) Microsoft as the Evil Empire, I'll stick with Firefox.

[@Gramini]

It sounds like you are using Internet Explorer. Google has been there for a very long time. Also how is that relevant to this video?

[@Acceleronics]

@@Gramini It looks as though you can read, but not comprehend. My comment states that I use Firefox. In what way is your comment relevant to the video?

[@Gramini]

@@Acceleronics Oh wow... It looks as though you can read, but not comprehend. My comment was a joke. In what way is your comment relevant to the video?

[@Acceleronics]

@@Gramini So your comment was a joke but your question was not?

[@SWLinPHX]

People have subconscious and longtime ingrained ideas of what symbols mean, even before computers. In the 1990's when average homemakers and housewives started using computers and Internet more there is a true story. As any long time Mac user knows, the Classic Mac OS 1-9 displayed a dialog box with an old-fashioned bomb icon when the computer crashed or you needed to restart (you know, the black ball with the fuse). One mother was so concerned she quickly evacuated her kids and everyone out of the house.

[@im36degrees]

iconography is important, this is a good change

[@1992Razvy]

it does not encrypt the url, only the body of the request... you can kind of still figure out what someone watched using the url they accessed

[@Denastus]

Edge and Opera are based on Chromium. If you use another of them I'd switch to either Safari or Firefox.

[@I_AM_NOVA.]

I thought Firefox has also switched to chromium

[@Denastus]

@@I_AM_NOVA. nope.

[@0106johnny]

Chromium is just so much better

[@Denastus]

@@0106johnny nah. Unless users protest chromiums manifest v3s policy on AdBlock extensions you will have a lot less secure experience.

[@0106johnny]

@@Denastus Lmao, you know that Firefox is dropping v2 as well, right?

[@galakstiv]

I agreee that the lock was confusing for non tech-savvy people. Had to explain to my dad that, no, the lock doesn't means the site is legit and you can put your credit card on it with your eyes closed.

[@nathan0401_]

Going to just continue using Firefox

[@techie7702]

Firefox already shows the sliders icon if you modify the permissions for a specific site.

[@k.alipardhan6957]

im glad for the Chrome extenstion, Sponcer Block. It told be to start watching in 3:00; Saves me a lot of time.

[@DaNerd01]

positive change! way to go Google

[@PrinceWesterburg]

This 'Tune Icon' doesn't look anything like the sliders. Gmail is a dog's dinner, it's UI is a f*cking disaster, typical of big corporates where the thing is developped by people who never meet. This is why, conversely, Apple's software is so svelt and elegant.

[@Bry.89]

Firefox Gang

[@ChristopherPunton]

Not ditching it just changing the icon and you managed to get a full video out of it, good job! 😂

[@agt313]

Vivaldi is the only browser that allows you to set a homepage to new tabs.

[@TheAmethystAurora]

You can do that on IE

[@Acceleronics]

I've been using a Firefox extension for many years that lets me set a home page for new tabs.

[@agt313]

@@Acceleronics Yes, with foreign extensions you can, but not by default.

[@therealinterlaced]

First

[@xDUnPr3diCtabl3]

Nope. Loser. Grow up.

[@killer2600]

Google is stupid. People still rely on that icon when they do their online banking and financial stuff. When that icon disappears there's going to be a ton of support calls and "I think I've been hacked" or "I think someone is trying to hack me" just because Google thought they had a bright idea to make things better for these very people that are now panicking - Google is stupid.

[@klaatubob]

When the powers that be started requiring ssl for any and every site so that http for a site that is informational only and has no login, no collection, etc is viewed as a negative, everyone started buying ssl certificates. Now the spoof sites all have certificates. The lock just means there's no man in the middle. It doesn't mean the site is friendly or secure in what it does with your data.

[@parabolicpanorama]

the site that has no https can also be mitm'd to include a form one day to sign up with no way for the end user to ever check if the site was updated or they're just at the wrong place.

[@2501bproject]

can you please cover all the displayport protocols, pointing out what gpu would take to hold a 3xSamsung G9 Odyssey, and all the caveats about syncing at a specific frequency and cable bandwidth? i mean, when can we expect that a setup like that will not make a fullscreen game blank out when a lot of object are on screen? when the 7090ti comes out?

[@NatesHomeTours]

So what your saying is google is gonna copy Firefox. They have that "tune" icon right next to the lock icon in the address bar.

[@LordKerry]

HI is there an "after market" replacement for Home Group?

[@ash36230]

"Odds are you use Google Chrome or a Chromium-based browser" oh Firefox please never go to the dark side

[@InsertGame1]

I think it's pretty cool you guys got a young Ned Flanders to tell us about today's sponsor.

[@Minecodes]

I use Bromite on my phone and tablet and it already got rid of it. There's a arrow instead of it, indicating a drop-down menu. On my PC I use Firefox and I use it with HTTPS-only, which means I don't need there either.

[@LIZARDKISSRHETORIC]

The same setting sliders Firefox already has - next to the padlock?! ... thanks Chrome, "Building Tomorrow Yesterday" could be your "In Serch Of Incredible". 🙂

[@otter502]

You can actually try out this and other redesigns in chrome flags Chrome refresh 2023 Is the flag I like everything but the omnibox font

[@bilboswaggings]

its almost like they could just show the full address of the website, this way you could see if its http or https for those who care, and also it would be harder to impersonate a bigger website with the address bar

[@little-wytch]

Would love to see a single LTT vid or series of TQ vids about http alternatives like gopher, gemini, ipfs and such.

[@coolmandan0303]

I have an episode request - how do websites with loaded items work? I don't know the official name, but things like Amazon Photos or Google Photos - is that a single website with a single address or is each photo read individually? Could individual photos be intercepted if on a non-secure site? How about the opposite case, when I'm on Google Maps and in street view, and every single movement creates a new address. Are there really infinite Google Maps address?

[@mihailmojsoski4202]

basically there are an infinite amount of possible address because they aren't like actual files on your computer, it's just text that gets sent to a program

[@mihailmojsoski4202]

and yes, if you aren't using HTTPS, your ISP, ANYONE connected to your network and anyone in between can potentially see every single individual image. if you are using HTTPS only you and the website can see your photos.

[@mihailmojsoski4202]

and if you aren't using HTTPS anyone can also see your passwords, your credit card info and they can also technically change the content of the site

[@shahriarzaman4715]

what the heat map indicates @ 3:25?

[@alberteinstein2040]

it did kinda imply the websites being totally secure as when you used to hover over it with mouse it said 'website secure'

[@FizzleFX]

*Good change* make ppl think for a minute!

[@somesalmon5694]

I agree with most commenters saying that getting rid of the lock is not a bad idea but that there still needs to be some readily present icon that denotes that the website is not configured with https

[@Formalec]

So it is not actually a removal of a feature but instead a clear improvement of existing functionality. Even the new design doesn't fully solve the issue. The same problem of people going reading to much into, and not understanding the limit of, a phrase like "connection is secure" is still there.

[@SneakyJoeRu]

I thought you were going to tell about manifest that would render adblockers inefficient.

[@MidgetWombat]

No standard user is clicking that settings tab to find more, now if it turned red with say a broken lock you would know the page is insecure or a broken cert. That I can get behind, but if you have to click the settings tab to find that out it's bad implementation.

[@Gramini]

Good thing is that it works like you want. A site using plain http gets a warning next to the icon.

[@sortofsmarter]

I recieved a call 2 weeks after buying my brand new GMC. I asked him what he has to offer that isn't covered by my 5/50k bumper to bumper and lifetime powertrain..he actually apologized and told me to have a good day, never got anymore calls from them...

[@Lepo4256]

Topic suggestion: What is the big deal with appliances labeled "inverter"? How are they so magically efficient?

[@fuseteam]

Obligatory https is not enough to stay secure on public wifi, that's why we have vpn for