Official: Google Chrome 69 kills off the World Wide Web (in URLs)


#1

Thought this could be important for troubleshooting…


#2

Good point, thats gonna be fun :wink:

No idea what they are thinking. Its just a pity that people mass-adopt Chrome as their one-and-only browser and give it the same power IE had. :man_shrugging:


Fun fact on a related note, one of Chrome Dev instances on version 70 is still on the old UI even though that should have changed already with the previous version :confused:


#3

Their stripping is particularly interesting, as appear to simply globally wipe “www.”

ftp.www.example.com appears to become ftp.example.com


#4

I knew the www was going away, along with the HTTP/HTTPS, but the m. was a surprise. I use that for a site, and I kind of like the m. going away.


#5

Hang on, the also remove m? Do they cut off everything after the domain itself?

I am fully with them on the HTTPS thing, removing parts of the hostname (“coz for lookz, bro”) is pure lunacy though I am afraid.


#6

Really? I am not :frowning: I am curious what happens with EV certificates?

As far as I understood they are not stripping everything.


#7

Can you elaborate why not?

The reason why I think the HTTPS thing is not bad, is because I believe everything should (more or less) slowly migrate to HTTPS. HTTPS should become the default, so entering a host one day wont go to port 80 by default but port 443 and if you insist on HTTP you’d need to specify it.


#8

Wow. I don’t like this at all. For a bunch of my client sites the ‘www’ means something. It contrasts with their ‘cdn’, ‘crm’, ‘amp’, etc. Google is continuing to profitize and consumerize every dang thing they can - now trying to make our domain names trendy for consumers. Augh.


#9

Definitely going to be confusing for some folks. Alot of my users who are switching to HTTPS and working on their non-HTTPS to HTTPS redirects at origin web server level (non-Cloudflare) and some perfer redirecting to www version of their domain and questions come up regarding this as my LEMP stack’s nginx vhost instructions default to redirect to non-www version. Now with Chrome hiding www version, folks are going to be asking why their non-www to www redirects aren’t working !


#10

I am only afraid Firefox will soon follow lead. Unfortunately Mozilla has played way too many times copycat in the recent years.


#11

EV certificates are at the moment still showing the name of the entity, but will soon loose all visible differences to the end user. You need to dig in to see any difference.


#12

They strip only www. and m., but I expected only at the beginning, not in the middle of the URL. That seems like a bug to me, but it’s strange anyway.


#13

It is a bug, but really something that shouldnt have happened.

Anyhow, why www and m? What about mobile? What about others? Sorry, the entire idea is just bad.


#14

I can see why the www., since most often than not with or without is the same, but the m. I don’t get.


#15

True, most of the time it is the same but not always and generally www.DOMAIN != DOMAIN.

I stick to it, its a bad idea.


#16

Agreeing with you, totally. But I can where at least they are coming from.

Removing the scheme I can understand totally (especially since the “Not Secure” on all non-HTTPS pages), they should even probably do like port 443 by default and then fallback if: no HSTS and no redirect.


#17

It is possible that “domain.com” and “www.domain.com” server different sites. In that case showing the ‘www’ certainly matters. How will Chrome know that, unless it checks with Google’s indexes?

Stuff like this is why I direct all of my clients to Firefox. My pitch is:

My professional recommendation (of over 20 years) is to use Firefox. For-profit companies build their browser to be self serving. Chrome supports google. Safari is for apple. IE is for microsoft. The all covertly track you to make money in the end.
Firefox is the only non-profit browser, built by freely by nerds who care about the web.


#18

Unfortunately “see above”


#19

Firefox is open source. I’d bet money the 700+ firefox developers won’t follow chrome here.


#20

On the scheme I assume they will, on the URL part don’t think so.