Close Menu
  • Home
  • Articles
    • Attacks
      • BEC
      • Data Breach
      • DDoS
      • Evasion Attacks
      • Injection
      • Malware
      • MITM
      • Phishing
      • Ransomware
      • RCE
      • Social Engineering
      • Spoofing
      • Spyware
    • Business and Policy
      • BCP and DRP
      • GRC
      • Regulations
    • Data Protection
      • DLP
      • DRM
      • Encryption
      • IAM
    • Future, Trends and Insight
      • AI
      • Events & Community
      • Emerging Tech
      • Expert Panel
      • Interviews With Experts
      • Insights
      • Study & Research
    • Resources
      • Guides
      • Tools
      • Training & Education
    • Security
      • API
      • Apps
      • Cloud
      • Critical Infrastructure
      • Endpoint
      • Hardware
      • IoT
      • Mobile
      • Network
      • OT
      • Port Security
      • Security Architecture
      • Software Development
      • Supply Chain
      • Zero Trust
    • Threats and Vulnerabilities
      • Emerging Threats
      • Insider Threats
      • Risk Management
      • Threat Intelligence
      • Zero Day
  • News and Exclusives
    • Latest News
    • ISB Exclusive
    • Positive News
  • Who We Are
    • About Us
    • Information Security Buzz Expert Panel​
    • Write for Us
    • Media Pack
  • Contact Us
  • Newsletter
Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn
Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn
Information Security BuzzInformation Security Buzz
  • Home
  • Articles
    • Attacks
      • BEC
      • Data Breach
      • DDoS
      • Evasion Attacks
      • Injection
      • Malware
      • MITM
      • Phishing
      • Ransomware
      • RCE
      • Social Engineering
      • Spoofing
      • Spyware
    • Business and Policy
      • BCP and DRP
      • GRC
      • Regulations
    • Data Protection
      • DLP
      • DRM
      • Encryption
      • IAM
    • Future, Trends and Insight
      • AI
      • Events & Community
      • Emerging Tech
      • Expert Panel
      • Interviews With Experts
      • Insights
      • Study & Research
    • Resources
      • Guides
      • Tools
      • Training & Education
    • Security
      • API
      • Apps
      • Cloud
      • Critical Infrastructure
      • Endpoint
      • Hardware
      • IoT
      • Mobile
      • Network
      • OT
      • Port Security
      • Security Architecture
      • Software Development
      • Supply Chain
      • Zero Trust
    • Threats and Vulnerabilities
      • Emerging Threats
      • Insider Threats
      • Risk Management
      • Threat Intelligence
      • Zero Day
  • News and Exclusives
    • Latest News
    • ISB Exclusive
    • Positive News
  • Who We Are
    • About Us
    • Information Security Buzz Expert Panel​
    • Write for Us
    • Media Pack
  • Contact Us
  • Newsletter
Subscribe
Information Security BuzzInformation Security Buzz
Home - Articles - Should SSL Slow You Down?
Articles

Should SSL Slow You Down?

Brian A. McHenryBy Brian A. McHenryJune 2, 2016Updated:June 30, 20214 Mins Read
Share LinkedIn Twitter Facebook Copy Link Email
Share
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Copy Link
Quick AI Summary
ChatGPTClaudeGeminiGrokPerplexityDeepSeekCopilot

For most of us, when we think “encryption,” we do not immediately think “high performance” or “easy.” However, advances in TLS (the successor to obsolete SSL) and other protocols as well as cipher implementations have greatly reduced the workloads associated with encryption—all while commodity processing power and capabilities continue to increase, despite apparent slow-downs in Moore’s Law. The only reason we still associate TLS encryption with high overhead and complexity is that we’ve mostly been concerned with maintaining high grades on SSL Labs.com for strong and effective encryption.

In speaking to many information security practitioners, SSL Labs grades and green browser address bars take a back seat if it affects page load time. Ilya Grigorik, web performance engineer and self-described “Internet plumber” at Google, launched IsTLSfastYet.com. His goal is to raise awareness around all the performance optimizations available to accelerate the adoption of TLS encryption. On this site as well as his blog, Grigorik covers the finer points in great detail. At a high level, whether you’re seeking to improve TLS performance via a CDN or by tuning your server, load balancer, or other proxy, there are some key features that should be supported by any system or service that terminates TLS.

  • Start at layer 4. Communications over TLS require different TCP tuning and optimization than clear-text communications via HTTP only. Many performance problems perceived to be TLS overhead are actually the result of poorly tuned TCP settings. Ensure that any system or service terminating TLS enables appropriate tuning of TCP.
  • Eliminate redirects. Redirecting HTTP requests to HTTPS is a common practice for identifying certain hostnames that require HTTPS. However, redirects affect user experience and page load time. By using HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS) headers, all requests will come directly via HTTPS, and by using Server Name Indication (SNI), a single IP endpoint can handle multiple hostnames and associated certificate/key pairs.
  • Prefer Forward Secrecy. Today, Perfect Forward Secrecy (PFS) is enabled via DHE and ECDHE ciphers and, in general, facilitates the use of TLS False Start. Fortunately, Forward Secrecy is one of the key components in the SSL Labs rating criteria and enabling the best possible privacy via TLS, and is easily tested via SSLLabs.com.
  • Support ALPN. Application Layer Protocol Negotiation is part of the now-deprecated SPDY protocol from Google. ALPN succeeded NPN, and is a method by which the application layer protocol to be run over TLS can be negotiated ahead of time, and enhances performance by reducing round trips. The main mechanism for enabling ALPN is via moving to the HTTP/2 protocol, which is transported via TLS by default.
  • Session identifiers and tickets. Some real nitty gritty aspects of the TLS protocol greatly affect performance, depending upon whether they’re enabled. Session Identifiers (RFC 5246) enable TLS session resumption, which has the effect of eliminating new TLS handshakes (and round trip plus encryption overhead associated). Session Tickets (RFC 5077) enhance Session Identifiers by eliminating the need for the server to cache every Session Identifier by providing the client with a Session Ticket.
  • Enable Dynamic Record Sizing. Dynamic Record Sizing reduces and optimizes the overhead of TLS framing. From O’Reilly’s High Performance Browser Networking: “Using a dynamic strategy delivers the best performance for interactive traffic: small record size eliminates unnecessary buffering latency and improves the time-to-first-{HTML byte, …, video frame}, and a larger record size optimizes throughput by minimizing the overhead of TLS for long-lived streams.”
  • OCSP Stapling. The Online Certificate Status Protocol (OCSP) helps solve the problem of establishing the authenticity of a given certificate without shipping a library of known certificates with every client, as with Certificate Revocation Lists (CRLs). However, OCSP induces a lot of latency via the addition of round trips between the client and the issuing Certificate Authority (CA). OCSP Stapling enables a TLS server to “staple” or cache a digital signature from the issuing CA to the certificate, thereby eliminating round trips from the browser.

As the march toward HTTPS everywhere continues, information security practitioners need to be armed with the tools to ensure that encryption never sacrifices performance. Page load times are a vital metric for how sticky or popular a site or service might be, and increasingly, the quality of the encryption (as determined by the browser and/or SSL Labs) has become another factor for both search-index rank and customer preferences. Encryption via TLS is at a critical intersection of performance and security and, as such, requires focused attention. Selecting and configuring TLS-based systems and services capable of performance optimizations is vital to the success of any Internet-based application.

Brian_McHenry
Brian A. McHenry

As a Senior Security Solutions Architect at F5 Networks, Brian McHenry focuses on web application and network security. McHenry acts as a liaison between customers and F5 product teams, providing a hands-on, real-world perspective. He is a regular contributor on InformationSecurityBuzz.com, a co-founder of BSidesNYC, and a speaker at AppSecUSA, BC Aware Day, GoSec Montreal, and the Central Ohio Infosec Summit, among others. Prior to joining F5 in 2008, McHenry, a self-described IT generalist, held leadership positions within a variety of technology organizations, ranging from startups to major financial services firms.

  • Brian A. McHenry
    The WAF Is Not Enough
  • Brian A. McHenry
    Access Management, With A Side Order Of Identity
  • Brian A. McHenry
    The Internet of Thingbots
  • Brian A. McHenry
    Black Hat USA 2017: Bigger and Better (?)

The opinions expressed in this post belong to the individual contributors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Information Security Buzz.

Share. Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Copy Link

Related Posts

Visual data is the blind spot in enterprise security: that’s about to change

May 4, 20267 Mins Read

Making stolen data worthless: why security must start with the data

March 30, 20265 Mins Read

Meta’s Smart Glasses Privacy Scandal Expands After Sama Credentials Found on the Dark Web

March 10, 20264 Mins Read
ISB-Bora-Side-Bar

 
ISB-Bora-Side-Bar
Black ISB Logo

Information Security Buzz is an independent resource that provides the experts’ comments, analysis, and opinion on the latest Cybersecurity news and topics

X (Twitter) LinkedIn Facebook RSS

Working With Us

  • About Us
  • Advertise With Us
  • Contact Us

Write For Us

  • How To Contribute

The Pages

  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • AI Policy
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Copyright Notice

Information Security Buzz and all its contents are copyright © 2014-2025. All rights reserved. All third-party trademarks are recognized.

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.

Manage Consent
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes. The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
  • Manage options
  • Manage services
  • Manage {vendor_count} vendors
  • Read more about these purposes
View preferences
  • {title}
  • {title}
  • {title}