- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2013 12:15:35 +0000
- To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: Karl Dubost <karl@la-grange.net>, Odin Hørthe Omdal <odinho@opera.com>, WebAppSec WG <public-webappsec@w3.org>, Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote: > So you mean that if a CGI does a 304 redirect and sends some response > headers and a response body, then apache will filter out the headers but > send the 304 and the body? Is this specific to 304s? 304 is not strictly a redirect. 304 is "Not Modified". An indication from the server that you can use the cached copy. > Either way, a security issue can't be ignored because servers suck. We > should still require the headers to be sent. Authors can always use other > 30x responses. Not for these semantics. Mark, Julian, do you think CORS headers should be required on a 304 response? -- http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Wednesday, 4 December 2013 12:16:04 UTC