Today I reread some thoughts of mine on how super-computers may engage in battle. What I wrote got me thinking in another direction: how can we, even today, be sure that what we read on the internet is what the alleged author intends us to see? Especially if our connection to the webserver is not encrypted, man-in-the-middle attacks are a very real possibility.
How far do you trust your own hosting provider not to manipulate your content?
How far do you trust your ISP not to manipulate what you access?
How far do you trust the providers of other people?
It struck me that we already have technology to alleviate such concerns: cryptographic signatures. WeNot enough people do, sadly. already use them for emails and the principle transfers to websites. Just like for emails, adoption can only happen if it is easy to use; a criterion encryption features of mail clients frequently fail to satisfy.
The process I use for this website lends itself very well to fully integrating the signing of the generated websites. A quickly coded proof-of-concept implementation provides a fair user experience already; no user interaction is necessary at all. Now, every (local) file used on this website has been signed with PGP; The signatures do not tell you anything unless you trust the used public key, of course. the footer links to the relevant files. For instance, find the signatures of this post here.
Of course, I am not the first person to have this idea. There has even been a proposal for integrating signatures into HTML, and standards for XML exist. But: have you ever seen a signed website? I have not.
Need, standards and tools are necessary for anything like this to get traction. Do you see the need for signing websites?