Treating paths and queries differently, was: Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-nottingham-http-proxy-problem-01.txt

On 2014-07-15 15:42, Eric Rescorla wrote:
>  ...
> Mark can of course do as he likes with his document, but I would
> not support adding this text to a WG document as I do not believe
> that it is accurate.
> It is quite common to have sensitive information in the path part of
> URLs (for instance, Amazon item numbers appear here), and in
> many cases, this is the only sensitive information required to
> reconstruct the user's browsing history. I don't consider this to
> be "very little actual privacy" loss.
> -Ekr

Agreed. We shouldn't rely on a perceived difference that neither is 
backed up by the specs, nor is there in practice.

Best regards, Julian

Received on Tuesday, 15 July 2014 14:01:32 UTC