- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Tue, 3 May 2011 11:47:45 +1000
- To: "Thomson, Martin" <Martin.Thomson@commscope.com>
- Cc: httpbis mailing list <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 03/05/2011, at 11:10 AM, Thomson, Martin wrote: > The issue of logging HTTP requests has come up in a discussion in another working group. > > The goal is not just to prevent someone from learning that a certain person requested a certain resource, but to protect the identity of the resource. That is, the very existence of the resource is a secret. > > I understand that with CONNECT an intermediary only really knows that a particular server has been contacted, but what about unsecured HTTP? Does the value of the Cache-Control header have any bearing on whether something is logged? Nope. I suppose you could read Cache-Control: no-store has having those semantics, but it doesn't in any implementation I'm aware of. Perhaps we need to clarify that. > What sort of logging does an HTTP intermediary typically do? The Squid format is fairly common; see: http://wiki.squid-cache.org/SquidFaq/SquidLogs#access.log http://www.squid-cache.org/Doc/config/logformat/ Cheers, -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Tuesday, 3 May 2011 01:48:14 UTC