On Sun, 11 Jun 2006 22:02:15 +0200, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote: >> Wouldn't sending a body with a method that doesn't allow a body result >> in allowing request smuggling? > > Well, in only in a broken implementation. See > <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc2616.html#rfc.section.4.3>: The request smuggling whitepaper demonstrated that major and widely used servers and proxy servers were broken, or parsed things differently in a way that enabled request smuggling... > "The presence of a message-body in a request is signaled by the > inclusion of a Content-Length or Transfer-Encoding header field in the > request's message-headers. A message-body MUST NOT be included in a > request if the specification of the request method (Section 5.1.1) does > not allow sending an entity-body in requests. A server SHOULD read and > forward a message-body on any request; if the request method does not > include defined semantics for an entity-body, then the message-body > SHOULD be ignored when handling the request." ..possibly because the final SHOULD really SHOULD have been a MUST..? -- Hallvord R. M. Steen Core QA JavaScript tester, Opera Software http://www.opera.com/ Opera - simply the best Internet experienceReceived on Monday, 12 June 2006 09:35:24 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:18:55 GMT