Should RFD implement secure encripted log in using https: instead of http:?

[aviador]

Non encripted log in is a well-known security risk. Anyone can sniff it. RFD uses unsecure log in -- http: --, leaving its customers open to eavesdropping. If a customer is naive enought to use the same password in RFD as in their email account, he/she is doomed.

So, should RFD protect its customers' privacy using secure log in protocols?

Yes
No

Edit
------------------
The post is about secure log in, not about secure navigation which could slow down the servers and need more overhead.
The passwords would be protected, but not the session cookies. (i.e., no hijacking, possible sidejacking)
Please read these links
Why should I care about https: http://lifehacker.com/5745086/why-should-i-care-about-https-on-facebook-or-other-web-sites
https in gmail: http://support.google.com/mail/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=74765
https in facebook: http://www.facebook.com/blog/blog.php?post=486790652130
Wi-Fi eavesdropping prevention: http://www.ciscopress.com/articles/article.asp?p=1750204
Password protection against sniffing: http://lifehacker.com/5853483/a-guide-to-sniffing-out-passwords-and-cookies-and-how-to-protect-yourself-against-it

A good example of https: sign in (log in) is fatwallet: https://www.fatwallet.com/join.php?refpage=%2Fforums%2Fhot-deals%2F

[KorruptioN]

Of course!

[ishfish]

Are there disadvantages to encripting?

[aviador]

Are there disadvantages to encripting?

Yup.
Navigation is slower
Redirection can be cumbersome when external links are included
Requires more server/overhead resources

But, we are polling about secure log in only. Not about full secure sessions. It's just about protecting your log in information, indirectly protecting your identity, registered email, phone, etc. The same way you want to protect this information in yahoo, gmail, hotmail, facebook, etc.

The disadvantages are minimal compared to the advantages.