W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-talk@w3.org > July to August 1995

Re: 3 Proposals: session ID, business-card auth, customer auth

From: Brian Behlendorf <brian@organic.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 1995 10:58:50 -0700 (PDT)
To: "Daniel W. Connolly" <connolly@beach.w3.org>
Cc: Terry Myerson <tmyerson@iserver.interse.com>, www-talk@w3.org
Message-Id: <Pine.3.89.9507181018.M29440-0100000@eat.organic.com>
On Tue, 18 Jul 1995, Daniel W. Connolly wrote:
> Hmmm... care to give some details about these "ideas coming down
> the pipe?" Here are my thoughts, after having surveyed this space
> for a while:

You basically hit all the ones I'm thinking off, more or less.

> ******* I. The Request-ID: header field:

Yup!  Would it be asking too much to make this a mandatory, or strongly
recommended, part of the request?  With truely random ID's persistant only
for the course of a session, then I don't see how this information could be
resold in a way that compromises security or the privacy of the client.

> ******* II. The business-card authentication scheme

Sounds good - the set of common fields should be laid out somehow.  Also, 
the authentication response might be a little different - instead of 
denying access an information provider might just want to shunt them off 
to a separate area.  I suppose that can be in the body of the 401 
response though.  For bandwidth/efficiency reasons, maybe just passing 
along a URL would suffice?  Perhaps this URL could point to a document in 
some sort of regular business-card format, which could just be a list of 
attribute: value pairs?

> ok... I've run out of time for doing this right now, but rather than
> stuff it away somewhere, I'm going to go ahead and send it out for
> discussion. The IIIrd proposal is basically the Netscape cookie idea,
> except that it ought to be re-cast as an HTTP authentication
> mechanism.

Cookies also largely obsolete the Request-ID proposal, modulo concerns 
about privacy.

> I haven't had time to discuss the privacy issues in detail, nor talk
> about the required but hidden IVth proposal, which is that proxies and
> caches relay certain log info to information providers.

I believe HTTP-NG had automated provisions for this?

	Brian

--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--
brian@organic.com  brian@hyperreal.com  http://www.[hyperreal,organic].com/
Received on Tuesday, 18 July 1995 13:58:55 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 27 October 2010 18:14:17 GMT