BBC websites blocked in China after security change

Haha, this sentence:<p>« It has altered all of its addresses from beginning &quot;HTTP&quot; to &quot;HTTPS&quot;, which is widely considered to be a more secure connection »<p>Widely considered, I love it.

Why is that so surprising ? Moving to <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;</a> makes it harder for the GFW to identify people who read specific articles. I can see how China feels news platforms that are <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;</a> only need to be blocked.<p>Out of curiosity: how do other news outlets fare ?

Psiphon looks interesting, but if it&#x27;s a network of thousands of proxy servers, then it will be trivial for the GFW to block those servers, no?

Interestingly, the screencap that&#x27;s the hero image for TFA includes a comparison between a picture of Xi and Obama and a picture of Winnie the Pooh and Tigger.<p>The Xi =&gt; Pooh comparison is (to my understanding) a common one in China, and one the Party tries to suppress.

AFAIK there’s not problem with https in China - today most companies use https for their websites and app servers, see Baidu, Taobao, JD, etc. Maybe BBC didn’t register things correctly with the govt or the govt is just specifically targeting them. But the article’s title is a little misleading by implying that https leads to GFW blocking.

&quot;We&#x27;ve seen cases outside the UK, with some of our World Service sites where foreign governments have tried to [track which articles and videos you&#x27;re looking at or selectively suppress individual pieces of content].&quot;<p>Is there any more information about such instances or is that insider knowledge?

BBC News was my captive portal go-to site. Sad to lose the non-redirecting http version.