How Law Firm Sites Can Avoid Google's 'Not Secure' Stamp
It's time to encrypt your law firm's website, or visitors will see a “not secure” warning.
July 25, 2018 at 12:50 PM
4 minute read
This week, Google started marking all non-encrypted websites as “not secure” when viewed through its Chrome browser, which has about a 60 percent market share. If your firm's website address starts with HTTP rather than HTTPS, you are impacted by this update, and your website visitors will notice. You won't fall off the internet like some unscrupulous vendors claim, but now is a good time to follow Google's lead, contact your web team and encrypt your website. Google Makes Good on Its Security Promise For the past couple of years, Google has been pushing for a safer web experience by asking website owners to adopt new security protocols. You might have noticed there are fewer website addresses starting with HTTP as more sites have transitioned to HTTPS encryption. In fact, Google claims that over 73 percent of traffic on its Chrome browser is now protected, up more than 20 percent in just one year. You've read about compromised networks redirecting visitors to fake websites, and eavesdropping of browsing activity through Wi-Fi networks, by internet service providers, and even (allegedly) by government agencies. While HTTPS isn't perfect, encrypted websites keep these issues from occurring by authenticating your website, limiting the search data that can be seen by prying eyes or entities, and blocking outside access to unencrypted data—such as your website contact form. Up until now, Google has focused on larger websites, especially those conducting financial transactions. As of this week, the new Google Chrome browser version 68 started highlighting all HTTP websites as “Not Secure.” post Time to Encrypt Your Firm's Website If you haven't yet transitioned to HTTPS, there's no need to panic. This isn't another Googlegeddon, as encryption currently plays only a tiny role in determining your search engine exposure. That said, there are three great reasons to make the change sooner rather than later:
- As a trusted resource, you don't want clients to see a “not secure” indicator when they visit your site—especially if it includes a secure client portal.
- The change should be inexpensive, with an SSL digital certificate (the key ingredient for HTTPS) costing $30 to $100 annually depending on where you buy it. Some hosting providers are now even offering free SSL certificates.
- Google will continue to continue its quest for a safe and secure web. More changes are coming that will impact your website.
Implement HTTPS the Right Way Your web team can handle this for you, but there are still several steps required to ensure that the site is actually secure and visitor traffic isn't impacted. Here is generally what needs to happen:
- Purchase and install the SSL certificate—the easy part, especially if you have a modern WordPress website.
- Permanently redirect your website address from HTTP to HTTPS—automatically sends visitors (and Google bots) to the right site.
- Change static HTTP references on website pages to HTTPS—this last step is often overlooked, causing a “not fully secure” warning when people visit your website.
What Will Google Do Next? That's a great question, but no one other than Google employees really know the answer. Google has hinted that it will start penalizing non-secure websites at some point. It will also start using speed as a website ranking factor for searches made on mobile devices. As we've experienced with these new security guidelines, Google normally keeps its promises. Dave Slovin is president of PracticeProfs, an Atlanta-based agency that provides comprehensive marketing management services for law firms.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllBusiness Breakups: Why Business and Commercial Cases Are Well-Suited to Mediation
5 minute readIn RE: Hair Relaxer Marketing, Sales Practices and Products Liability Litigation
Trending Stories
- 1How Amy Harris Leverages Diversity to Give UMB Financial a Competitive Edge
- 2Pa. Judicial Nominee Advances While Trump Demands GOP Unity Against Biden Picks
- 3The Unraveling of Sean Combs: How Legislation from the #MeToo Movement Brought Diddy Down
- 4Publication of Information Regarding Client Matters
- 5The State of Cost Recovery — Post COVID
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250