Crack posted:

I know I came across as a bit paranoid earlier but really it's about balancing risk. I'm not sure if you mean ssl encryption or stored data encryption but I guess in the end its not really relevant. It's not true that a non perfectly secured website is 100% compromised, unless it's a particularly juicy target. There have been examples of banks for example that have been told they have an exploit and need to patch (maybe with a risk of $60k loss from hackers per few months) and the patch takes a day, but the bank rakes 1mil+ per day so it's inconsequential and they don't patch because it doesn't actually make financial sense. So just think when submitting info on a website, do I need to use real info (it's easy to lie in many fields), how sensitive or valuable is this info - especially to a crim, and what is the companies track record regarding breaches (type example.com exploits or similar in google if it's fairly large and you will probably find how long they took to implement a patch).

Also it almost goes without saying but the fewer companies that store your data the less chance of compromise.

https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/index.html plug it in here if it's https, look at the results and make a decision. If it's F, maybe it isn't so great and you should email the webmaster the ssltest results.