Since all (American) browsers are set by default to "DEFCON 1", which produces both a "runaway effect" on unsuspecting users and a cumulonimbus that translates into a profitable business for providers of SSL certificates, I have decided to make my own little contribution to the dissipation of the global toxic fog, by addressing the issue the NetPlusUltra® way, i.e. from a conceptual perspective.
An introductory guide to SSL:
Although most introductions to this subject matter area confirm that a simple information website does not require SSL certification, the conceptual intellectual property framework which I am promoting herewith forces to be more specific about this first statement, by simply forbidding anonymity, considering first that there can be no recognition of an author's moral right upon his work without proper identification, and second, that without moral recognition of his productions, an author can't sustain a living from the latter. Which means not only that a website must be duly signed by the author, but also that the visitor must be able to verify that the hosting server matches the author's signature.
Difference between shared and private SSL:
This is where the second authentification criteria comes into the picture, with the localization of the web hosting server. A self-respecting author will therefore look beyond the simple question of identification, and publish on his own initiative - because it is in his double moral and economic interest - an "End Credits" page providing a minimum of information on the conception of his website, in order to be able to work without costly SSL options until publishing becomes a matter of securing access to private spaces and/or payment procedures through contract forms.
Shared SSL at OVH, guides 1 and 2:
If the verification I am inviting you to proceed to on the "SSL Checkers" page of this website suffices to validate all this, it also aims at helping visitors to properly interpret the alert messages of their browsers, and to remind them that it is an author's right to require a minimum of reciprocity from his audience with regard to transparent interactions: henceforth, the activation of the shared SSL option on my shared web hosting server (triggers off the warning that) raises public awareness of the SSL issue, giving the visitor the opportunity to prove himself worthy of the web franchising service which I am developing.
Conclusion: the above OVH guides to shared SSL confirm (and so does the technical support staff with which I have validated my interpretation) that this kind of certification encrypts potentially sensitive data transiting through contact forms, while at the same time providing a high enough level of guarantee to secure certain types of online banking transactions. But when it comes to creating a climate of confidence between the different parties to the interaction (the solution providing author, the visiting client, and the third-party web hosting provider), the necessity of resorting to further certification through a fourth-party auditor (the SSL certification authority) largely depends on the professionalism with which every party meets the challenge of user experience engineering. Considering the prevailing lack of transparency, it is therefore highly regrettable that the negligence of the ones translates into an added value taxation for the others, of whom the ensuing confusion negatively impacts the service cost price by doubling the price of their hosting package. In light of this, it appears necessary to require some more preventive upstream transparency from everyone.
A web to the unwise is enough !