W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2012

Re: Introducing a Session header...

From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2012 14:53:24 +0200
To: Ross Nicoll <jrn@jrn.me.uk>
Cc: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <20120720125324.GB23756@1wt.eu>
On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 01:45:50PM +0100, Ross Nicoll wrote:
> On 20/07/2012 13:35, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> >In message <8d6b6668433e8aa7c67601ab9b0f485d.squirrel@arekh.dyndns.org>, 
> >"Nicol
> >as Mailhot" writes:
> >
> >>The problem if you do it this way is that:
> >>3. the user agent has no information if it should share the id with
> >>another site or not
> >Ohh, that's the disconnect:  It should _never_ share the session-id
> >with any other site, that's sort of the entire point.
> We rather do want sites to share session IDs, actually, so we can do 
> easy single-sign-on. At the moment we fairly much only do this within a 
> domain, but in the future we might see something like Project Moonshot ( 
> http://www.project-moonshot.org/ ) providing single-sign-on for all UK 
> academic institutions (this is really useful for cases such as external 
> examiners being able to access resources in institutions not their own, 
> for example). Of course, we do also want to control how session IDs are 
> shared (I don't think it's something I'd want my bank doing!)

Note that SSO actually does work cross-domain using redirects. It's just
not the easiest thing to do but it does work. Cross-domain cookies are
extremely dangerous and badly used. I regularly see some websites ask me
for help with their site behaving in a bad way using new browsers and I
can tell you that sometimes you see scary things. I'm glad Adam Barth has
worked on RFC6265 to remind what's right and what's wrong.

Regards,
Willy
Received on Friday, 20 July 2012 12:53:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 20 July 2012 12:54:02 GMT