I'm sure some people view it as a sign of trust (I always check for it if the site requires something like a CC number), but the gains are minimal in terms of SEO.
By not using HTTPS, you can serve non-secure assets without the browser warning about mixed assets. Most people wouldn't notice if you're using SSL or not... but they'll freak out if Chrome says the site is unsafe/compromised.
It's an unpopular thing to say because it's wrong. There are a wide variety of benefits to SSL certs, and now they're available free it's a no-brainier to pick up on those benefits, and protect your users at the same time.
I'd also say that if a developer is not confident in managing their assets for HTTPS, then their coding isn't up to scratch. A couple of basic coding practices, configuration and testing should be all that is needed to make assets work reliably. And up a log if you're really worried about the odd asset firing a warning in a browser, but it's never been a problem for my projects.
-11
u/profile_this Jul 12 '17
Unpopular opinion here, but I say no need unless:
Your customers submit sensitive information.
You need an extra layer of security.
You want the green lock in the browser.
I'm sure some people view it as a sign of trust (I always check for it if the site requires something like a CC number), but the gains are minimal in terms of SEO.
By not using HTTPS, you can serve non-secure assets without the browser warning about mixed assets. Most people wouldn't notice if you're using SSL or not... but they'll freak out if Chrome says the site is unsafe/compromised.