- From: <wizard@newsreports.org>
- Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 23:51:12 -0500
- To: paulle@windows.microsoft.com
- Cc: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Ok, uncle :) I see what I believed and what is fact are two different things. I really should not have been so lazy about pulling up 2616. My apologies to one and all. I guess it's back to the drawing boards for my stuff. Whether it currently works or not is moot (sniff!), if it is non-compliant then, I guess I gotta suck it up. Best Regards, Bob Paul Leach wrote: > > RFCs 2616 and 2396 (which updates 1738) are clear that username:password is > NOT legal in HTTP URLs. > > >From 2616: > > 3.2.2 http URL > > The "http" scheme is used to locate network resources via the HTTP > protocol. This section defines the scheme-specific syntax and > semantics for http URLs. > > http_URL = "http:" "//" host [ ":" port ] [ abs_path [ "?" query ]] > > If the port is empty or not given, port 80 is assumed. The semantics > are that the identified resource is located at the server listening > for TCP connections on that port of that host, and the Request-URI > for the resource is abs_path (section 5.1.2). The use of IP addresses > in URLs SHOULD be avoided whenever possible (see RFC 1900 [24]). If > the abs_path is not present in the URL, it MUST be given as "/" when > used as a Request-URI for a resource (section 5.1.2). If a proxy > receives a host name which is not a fully qualified domain name, it > MAY add its domain to the host name it received. If a proxy receives > a fully qualified domain name, the proxy MUST NOT change the host > name. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org > > [mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of > > wizard@newsreports.org > > Sent: Friday, January 30, 2004 5:27 PM > > To: Michael Howard; ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org; HTTP Working > > Group; Michael Howard > > Cc: Dave Kristol > > Subject: Re: Microsoft to Strike IE URL Passwords > > > > > > Michael, > > > > Off the top of my head, so I may be totally off base :) > > > > But, username:password@example.com is a valid uri in the http > > protocol. It follows, therefore, that it is a valid HREF > > value in an <A> tag. If the browser then does something other > > than is intended when the <A> tag is invoked, then it is > > arguably non-compliant. > > > > That is my argument in a nutshell. Now, I could get all > > scholarly and dig out all the references, but this would make > > the argument much more obtuse and hard to follow. I would not > > advance anything that I did not feel was supported in the > > relevant RFC's. > > > > Now, as a matter of practicality, IE is a Microsoft product > > and Microsoft can do as it wishes. Further, it can be argued > > that this is not a common usage of a uri. But, it *is* used > > and useful. To break it would be a shame. Especially if the > > shortcomings can be solved another way. > > > > To reiterate, the two problems that are referenced fall into > > the category of program bug, and rendering that is suitable > > for the majority of users. This is not a failing in the > > usage of the particular uri format at all. > > > > By kicking up a fuss as early as possible, I am hoping that > > more consideration will be given to a non-intrusive fix that > > will leave the intended functionality intact. > > > > Best Regards, > > > > Bob > > > > > > Michael Howard wrote: > > > > > > The plan, and it may change, is to nix username:pwd@ in a > > url. Correct > > > me if I'm wrong, but this format is only valid for ftp, not http. > > > > > > Cheers, Michael > > > > > > [Writing Secure Code 2nd Edition] > > > http://www.microsoft.com/mspress/books/5957.asp > > > [Protect Your PC] http://www.microsoft.com/protect [Blog] > > > http://blogs.msdn.com/michael_howard > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: wizard@newsreports.org [mailto:wizard@newsreports.org] > > > Sent: Friday, January 30, 2004 1:35 PM > > > To: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org; HTTP Working Group; Michael Howard > > > Cc: Dave Kristol > > > Subject: Re: Microsoft to Strike IE URL Passwords > > > > > > Michael, > > > > > > Is this not really a rendering problem? > > > > > > This remark includes the "%01" problem, and user perception > > that the > > > leading part before the "@" is the web site. > > > > > > The first is a problem internal to the browser, and should be fixed. > > > > > > The second is a rendering problem, in > > > that many users do not know the difference. > > > Therefore, it is more useful to present the url to the user without > > > the credentials portion. > > > > > > If the embedded credentials are permitted in a valid url, > > and that url > > > is embedded as, for example, the href of an <a> tag, and > > the browser > > > does not retrieve the referenced resource, then the browser > > is broken. > > > > > > Removing this valid behaviour will, in some cases, break > > many months > > > of work. I am involved in one such case. > > > > > > Bob > > > > > > Michael Howard wrote: > > > > > > > > Only the form: > > "http(s)://username:password@server/resource.ext" is > > > > being removed; basic auth is untouched. > > > > > > > > Cheers, Michael > > > > > > > > [Writing Secure Code 2nd Edition] > > > > http://www.microsoft.com/mspress/books/5957.asp > > > > [Protect Your PC] http://www.microsoft.com/protect [Blog] > > > > http://blogs.msdn.com/michael_howard > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org > > > > [mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org] > > > > On Behalf Of Dave Kristol > > > > Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2004 11:38 AM > > > > To: HTTP Working Group > > > > Subject: Microsoft to Strike IE URL Passwords > > > > > > > > <http://www.internetnews.com/dev-news/article.php/3305741> > > > > > > > > If I understand this article correctly, it sounds like MS IE will > > > > remove support for Basic Authentication. While we all agree that > > > > cleartext passwords are evil, this sounds to me like it > > will create > > > > a major compatibility problem at sites that use Basic. And note > > > > that it > > > > > > > covers Basic over SSL, too, where the passwords would *not* be > > > cleartext. > > > > > > > > Dave Kristol > > > > > > -- > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > FREE DOWNLOADS > > > > > > iis bandwidth protection -- http://coldlink.com/ > > > > > > iis password protection -- http://wanderware.com/ > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > .. > > > > -- > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > FREE DOWNLOADS > > > > iis bandwidth protection -- http://coldlink.com/ > > > > iis password protection -- http://wanderware.com/ > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > > .. > > > > -- ------------------------------------------------------------------ FREE DOWNLOADS iis bandwidth protection -- http://coldlink.com/ iis password protection -- http://wanderware.com/ ------------------------------------------------------------------ ..
Received on Friday, 30 January 2004 23:47:30 UTC