+
+>> My problem with that is that uses of the CGI aren't all equal (and that
+>> the CA model is broken). You could put CGI uses in two classes:
+>>
+>> - websetup and other "serious" things (for the sites I'm running, which
+>> aren't very wiki-like, editing pages is also in this class).
+>> I'd like to be able to let privileged users log in over
+>> https with httpauth (or possibly even a client certificate), and I don't
+>> mind teaching these few people how to do the necessary contortions to
+>> enable something like CACert.
+>>
+>> - Random users making limited use of the CGI: do=goto, do=404, and
+>> commenting with an OpenID. I don't think it's realistic to expect
+>> users to jump through all the CA hoops to get CACert installed for that,
+>> which leaves their browsers being actively obstructive, unless I either
+>> pay the CA tax (per subdomain) to get "real" certificates, or use plain
+>> http.
+>>
+>> On a more wiki-like wiki, the second group would include normal page edits.
+>>
+>> Perhaps I'm doing this backwards, and instead of having the master
+>> `url`/`cgiurl` be the HTTP version and providing tweakables to override
+>> these with HTTPS, I should be overriding particular uses to plain HTTP...
+>>
+>> --[[smcv]]
+