- From: John Franks <john@math.nwu.edu>
- Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 21:42:52 -0600 (CST)
- To: Paul Leach <paulle@microsoft.com>
- Cc: hallam@w3.org, http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
On Thu, 29 Feb 1996, Paul Leach wrote: > Are you just talking about D-MD, or Digest Auth for > Proxy-Authentication and Proxy-Authorization as well? > Digest-MessageDigest has been part of the draft since its very early versions. It has limitations. I don't think we are in a position to either remove it or overcome its limitations. The new nextnonce field seems to me to be a useful addition which is is a very modest change and not likely to lead to any unpleasant surprises. I also agree with Paul that there is not much reason to keep the user, nonce and realm fields. In the fullness of time we can and will create stronger ways of dealing with authentication, proxies, headers, etc. I propose that the D-MD section of this draft be: -------------------------------------- HTTP/1.1 200 OK Digest-MessageDigest: message="<message-digest>", nextnonce="<nextnonce>" The Digest-MessageDigest header indicates that the server wants to communicate some information regarding the successful authentication (such as a message digest or a new nonce to be used for the next transaction). <message-digest> is computed by the same algorithm given above for the body of the client request. This allows the client to verify that the body of the response has not been changed en-route. The server would probably only send this when it has the document and can compute it. The server would probably not bother generating this header for CGI output. <nextnonce> is the nonce the server wishes the client to use for the next authentication response. Either field is optional. In particular the server may send the Digest-MessageDigest header with only the nextnonce=<nextnonce> field as a means of implementing one-time nonces. If the nextnonce field is present the client is strongly encouraged to use it for the next WWW-Authenticate header. Failure of the client to do so may result in a request to re-authenticate from the server with the "stale=TRUE." The Digest-MessageDigest header has many limitations. Only the entity body is digested not any headers. This limitation is due to the fact that proxy caches may (and do) alter the headers of documents which they relay. Future authentication schemes will have to deal with the complexities imposed by the behavior of intermediaries handling documents on their way from the origin server to the client, but those issues are beyond the scope of digest authentication whose purpose is to replace Basic Authentication. Despite its limitations the Digest-MessageDigest can be useful. -------------------------------------- The full text of the latest draft is at http://hopf.math.nwu.edu/~john/new_rfc.txt John Franks Dept of Math. Northwestern University john@math.nwu.edu
Received on Thursday, 29 February 1996 19:47:11 UTC