[GH-ISSUE #1762] [Question] it may be in a future roadmap a HTPPS version? #1490

New issue

Open

opened 2026-02-28 01:30:17 +03:00 by kerem · 2 comments

kerem commented

2026-02-28 01:30:17 +03:00

Owner

Originally created by @GMagician on GitHub (Aug 31, 2024).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/tzapu/WiFiManager/issues/1762

I think HTTPS may be a security requirement for protected OTA, considering senfding also a signed bin.

Originally created by @GMagician on GitHub (Aug 31, 2024). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/tzapu/WiFiManager/issues/1762 I think HTTPS may be a security requirement for protected OTA, considering senfding also a signed bin.

kerem commented

2026-02-28 01:30:17 +03:00

Author

Owner

@tablatronix commented on GitHub (Sep 1, 2024):

Sure, can you link to an example or docs, thanks. I probably wont be maintaining this library anymore however.

@tablatronix commented on GitHub (Sep 1, 2024): Sure, can you link to an example or docs, thanks. I probably wont be maintaining this library anymore however.

kerem commented

2026-02-28 01:30:17 +03:00

Author

Owner

@GMagician commented on GitHub (Sep 1, 2024):

Thanks for your reply.
Not investigated enough but a good starting point may be the use of 'ESP8266WebServerSecure' instead of 'ESP8266WebServer'
HTTP require a CA certificate (even self signed may be sufficient), a server certificate and a server private key.
WiFiClientSecure has already methods to accept x509 certificates.

But I think to much effort if project is considered dead.

@GMagician commented on GitHub (Sep 1, 2024): Thanks for your reply. Not investigated enough but a good starting point may be the use of 'ESP8266WebServerSecure' instead of 'ESP8266WebServer' HTTP require a CA certificate (even self signed may be sufficient), a server certificate and a server private key. WiFiClientSecure has already methods to accept x509 certificates. But I think to much effort if project is considered dead.