Curious why you think it is needed in this case.
Curious why you think it is needed in this case.
There are plenty of reasons to use HTTPS [0] relating to privacy, security, UI, and browser features, and there are virtually no good reasons not to. There are just 2 real exceptions I know of, neither of which apply here:
1. Using unprotected HTTP enables caching. In the context of something like an apt repo, or Steam, this could be a compelling advantage. (apt provides its own checksum-based security, and doesn't really aim for privacy.)
2. Very old smartphones might not support modern TLS. In some parts of the world this can be a real concern. Even here, HTTPS should be offered, just not required.
asdffdsa mentioned plain old MITM. I listed several other applicable reasons in my linked comment:
1. It allows an unscrupulous ISP to more easily track your browsing
2. Modern browsers will rightly warn users not to trust the site. This makes the site look bad.
3. It prevents MITM injection of ads, trackers, and most importantly malware. There will always be browser exploits, so they're worth blocking.
Not only encryption is important, authentication too, you want to know to which party you are talking.
I think HTTPS is all well and good, but I've yet to hear a compelling reason why pages of text and images need it.