graeme_p - 6:03 am on Aug 13, 2013 (gmt 0)
1) Why warn that sites with self-signed certs are untrusted, but not sites without any certs (i.e. plain http connections). The former is definitely more secure?
2) "potentially opening their computers to being compromised" How?
3) People may well know what they are doing when clicking through - for example to a site with a self-signed cert. There is no evidence, for example, about which browser's user are more likely to click past a warning on a phishing site, for example.
4) The bit in bold half way down the article essentially invalidates everything else. Firefox stores exemptions, so so the numbers are not comparable.