IP encryption vs HTTPS: what’s the difference?
Explore the distinctions between IP‑layer encryption (IPsec) and HTTPS, their use cases, performance trade‑offs and overlapping functionalities.
For most use cases, a single well-implemented protocol is sufficient. The decision to use both should be guided by risk assessment, data classification, and regulatory obligations, rather than assumptions about added security.
Future directions
Both IPsec and HTTPS continue to evolve in response to emerging security threats, performance demands, and shifts in internet architecture.
On the IPsec side, development is driven by the IETF’s IP Security Maintenance and Extensions (ipsecme) working group, which focuses on refining key exchange mechanisms like IKEv2, supporting modern cryptographic algorithms(e.g., ChaCha20-Poly1305 for improved performance on low-power devices), and enhancing NAT traversal to improve compatibility across diverse networks. As enterprises adopt hybrid cloud and multi-site deployments, IPsec remains critical for establishing secure tunnels across complex topologies.
Meanwhile, HTTPS continues its rapid progression alongside the TLS protocol. The widespread adoption of TLS 1.3has reduced handshake times, deprecated older cryptographic suites, and improved privacy by encrypting more of the negotiation process itself. In parallel, HTTP/3, built on QUIC (a transport protocol running over UDP), introduces lower latency, built-in congestion control, and improved resilience for mobile and real-time applications.
Beyond these protocols, there’s a broader movement toward end-to-end encryption across all layers of the internet stack. Technologies like DNS-over-HTTPS (DoH) and DNS-over-TLS (DoT) aim to secure traditionally exposed DNS queries. Initiatives such as Encrypted Client Hello (ECH) further extend encryption into the TLS handshake, concealing metadata like the hostname from observers.
These advancements reflect a growing consensus: encryption should be the default, not the exception. As attackers become more sophisticated and surveillance capabilities expand, both IPsec and HTTPS will continue to adapt—ensuring the confidentiality, integrity, and authenticity of data in an increasingly interconnected world.
Trusted IPv4 Leasing for Business Growth
Get enterprise-grade IPv4 space quickly, with seamless deployment and end-to-end management.
FAQs
No, because HTTPS provides publicly trusted certificate-based identity verification, which IPsec lacks; the two serve different roles in the security stack.
Not significantly—thanks to TLS 1.3 and protocols like HTTP/2 and HTTP/3, HTTPS now delivers security with performance comparable to or even better than HTTP in many cases.
Generally no, unless you also need to secure other types of traffic beyond HTTP, such as internal database access or file sharing over IP.
Yes, they can be layered for added protection in certain scenarios, but it’s rarely necessary outside of environments with strict regulatory or security requirements.
Protocols like DNS-over-HTTPS (DoH) and DNS-over-TLS (DoT) enhance privacy by encrypting DNS queries, and are complementary to HTTPS and IPsec rather than replacements.
Related Blogs
- High-security environments may require layered encryption
Organisations operating under strict regulatory frameworks—such as banks or government agencies—may use IPsec to secure internal communication across data centres or office branches, protecting all IP traffic and concealing metadata like source and destination IP addresses. - HTTPS ensures public-facing application security
In the same environments, HTTPS is typically employed to secure external web services such as online banking platforms, ensuring encryption at the application layer and providing identity verification through trusted digital certificates. - Zero-trust architectures benefit from protocol layering
In modern zero-trust security models, both protocols may be used together to achieve defence-in-depth. IPsec enforces policy-based encryption across internal network segments, while HTTPS protects individual client-server interactions over HTTP. - Dual-layer encryption introduces operational complexity
Running both protocols in tandem can complicate deployment and maintenance. It may require additional certificate management, custom configurations, and more involved troubleshooting—especially when performance or compatibility issues arise. - Justified only in compliance-driven scenarios
The security benefit of overlapping encryption is often minimal unless explicitly mandated by standards such as FIPS 140-2, HIPAA, or classified system requirements. - Not the default choice for most organisations
For most use cases, a single well-implemented protocol is sufficient. The decision to use both should be guided by risk assessment, data classification, and regulatory obligations, rather than assumptions about added security.
Future directions
Both IPsec and HTTPS continue to evolve in response to emerging security threats, performance demands, and shifts in internet architecture.
On the IPsec side, development is driven by the IETF’s IP Security Maintenance and Extensions (ipsecme) working group, which focuses on refining key exchange mechanisms like IKEv2, supporting modern cryptographic algorithms(e.g., ChaCha20-Poly1305 for improved performance on low-power devices), and enhancing NAT traversal to improve compatibility across diverse networks. As enterprises adopt hybrid cloud and multi-site deployments, IPsec remains critical for establishing secure tunnels across complex topologies.
Meanwhile, HTTPS continues its rapid progression alongside the TLS protocol. The widespread adoption of TLS 1.3has reduced handshake times, deprecated older cryptographic suites, and improved privacy by encrypting more of the negotiation process itself. In parallel, HTTP/3, built on QUIC (a transport protocol running over UDP), introduces lower latency, built-in congestion control, and improved resilience for mobile and real-time applications.
Beyond these protocols, there’s a broader movement toward end-to-end encryption across all layers of the internet stack. Technologies like DNS-over-HTTPS (DoH) and DNS-over-TLS (DoT) aim to secure traditionally exposed DNS queries. Initiatives such as Encrypted Client Hello (ECH) further extend encryption into the TLS handshake, concealing metadata like the hostname from observers.
These advancements reflect a growing consensus: encryption should be the default, not the exception. As attackers become more sophisticated and surveillance capabilities expand, both IPsec and HTTPS will continue to adapt—ensuring the confidentiality, integrity, and authenticity of data in an increasingly interconnected world.
Trusted IPv4 Leasing for Business Growth
Get enterprise-grade IPv4 space quickly, with seamless deployment and end-to-end management.
FAQs
No, because HTTPS provides publicly trusted certificate-based identity verification, which IPsec lacks; the two serve different roles in the security stack.
Not significantly—thanks to TLS 1.3 and protocols like HTTP/2 and HTTP/3, HTTPS now delivers security with performance comparable to or even better than HTTP in many cases.
Generally no, unless you also need to secure other types of traffic beyond HTTP, such as internal database access or file sharing over IP.
Yes, they can be layered for added protection in certain scenarios, but it’s rarely necessary outside of environments with strict regulatory or security requirements.
Protocols like DNS-over-HTTPS (DoH) and DNS-over-TLS (DoT) enhance privacy by encrypting DNS queries, and are complementary to HTTPS and IPsec rather than replacements.
