W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 2009

Re: Referer URI MUST NOT include a fragment

From: Vincent Murphy <vdm@vdm.ie>
Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2009 22:01:12 +0000
Message-ID: <618cf5560902281401h2fc746adx4c3910671aa86986@mail.gmail.com>
To: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
Cc: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
2009/2/26 Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>:
> I think the idea of allowing fragment identifiers in
> Referer is interesting, and I'm not sure what it would
> break. It couldn't be mandated.

A SHOULD would be good enough because it would allow user agent
implementers to implement without contradicting HTTPbis. That would
make it much easier to advocate for this with incumbent browser

> I think the privacy
> security concerns about Referer remain, and perhaps
> the restriction was just a way of minimizing the
> exposure?

If the user information in web pages is based on the cookie/session;
an agent accessing the Referer resource wouldn't see that user
information. I believe this to be the case with most web pages.

I don't think the Referer would expose much information over and above
that which is already gathered in session logs using cookies.

> The important limits on Referer in RFC 2616
> are in the "Security Considerations" section
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2616#section-15.1.2

Thanks for the reference; I hadn't read that.

Perhaps security concerns like this could be addressed by having a
attribute on <a>, e.g. referer="none", which allows the author to
suppress the Referer header altogether. The default behaviour would be
to include a Referer header with the fragment id.
Received on Saturday, 28 February 2009 22:01:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:10:48 UTC