Firefox has taken the step of being UNREASONABLY PARANOID towards sites that don't shell out $90/year for an SSL certificate (that is how sites offer a secured, or https:// connection)

Microsoft had a warning like this (maybe they still do) in Internet Explorer. I think it's unreasonable. Maybe they're in bed with the SSL Certificate industry?

CathInfo doesn't accept credit cards or any other sensitive information, so I consider spending $90/year to be an unnecessary, wasteful expense. CathInfo is a discussion forum. I don't need to encrypt CathInfo posts as they travel from your PC to the CathInfo server -- that is what SSL encryption does. It scrambles the data stream during transmission so a lurking hacker can't intercept the data during transit.

For things like banking, credit card information, account numbers, Social Security number, drivers license -- sure. You want to keep that stuff secure, so a bad guy can't "sniff" the network and grab the info while it's being transmitted.

But a prayer request or bit of Resistance news? Who cares!

Long story short, you can SAFELY IGNORE this warning. There are sites that DO NOT need an SSL certificate: basically any site that doesn't involve sensitive information. Blogs, forums, etc. And yes, PLEASE DO consider this official technical advice from an experienced computer programmer and someone reasonably competent in cyber security.


https://support.mozilla.org/t5/Protect-your-privacy/Insecure-password-warning-in-Firefox/ta-p/27861

This is a new feature that is available starting in Firefox version 51.
 
Firefox will display a grey lock icon with a red strike-through in the address bar, when a login page you’re viewing does not have a secure connection. This is to inform you that if you enter your password it could be stolen by eavesdroppers and attackers.
 
Starting in Firefox version 52, you will also see a warning message when you click inside the login box to enter a username or password.
 
 
What can I do if a login page is insecure?
If a login page for your favorite site is insecure, you can try and see if a secure version of the page exists by typing https:// before the url in the location bar. You can also try to contact the web administrator for the site and ask them to secure their connection.
Not recommended: You can also continue to log in to the website even if the connection is insecure, but do so at your own risk. If you do go this route, try to use a unique password or a password that you don’t also use for other important sites.

About insecure pages
Pages that need to transmit private information, such as credit cards, personal information and passwords, need to have a secure connection to help prevent attackers from stealing your information. (Tip: A secure connection will have "HTTPS" in the address bar, along with a green lock icon.)
Pages that don’t transmit any private information can have an unencrypted connection (HTTP). It is not advised to enter private information, such as passwords, on a web page that shows HTTP in the address bar. The information you enter can be stolen over this insecure connection.

Firefox has taken the step of being UNREASONABLY PARANOID towards sites that don't shell out $90/year for an SSL certificate [....]   Microsoft had a warning like this (maybe they still do) in Internet Explorer.  I think it's unreasonable.  [....] 

There are sites that DO NOT need an SSL certificate: basically any site that doesn't involve sensitive information.

•   CathInfo does[ not] accept credit cards or any other sensitive information, so I consider spending $90/year to be an unnecessary, wasteful expense [....]
  

E.g., $90 in the context of expenses for groceries to satisfy reasonable appetites among your family?

[....] you can SAFELY IGNORE [the Firefox] warning.  And yes, PLEASE DO consider this official technical advice from an experienced computer programmer and someone reasonably competent in cyber security.

You young upstart !  Why, I was doing serious real-time programming back before you were, um, well, mmmph.  Sigh.  Never mind!

I concur completely with Matthew's analysis & recommendations above.

-------
Note #: I moved the sentence so marked, to the begining of Matthew's paragraph from later in the paragraph.