- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2013 16:05:06 +0100
- To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Karl Dubost <karl@la-grange.net>
- CC: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>, Odin Hørthe Omdal <odinho@opera.com>, WebAppSec WG <public-webappsec@w3.org>, Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>
On 2013-12-04 12:38, Jonas Sicking wrote: > > On Dec 4, 2013 3:27 AM, "Karl Dubost" <karl@la-grange.net > <mailto:karl@la-grange.net>> wrote: > > > > > > Le 4 déc. 2013 à 06:08, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> a écrit : > > > What do you mean "scraps them"? What headers are we talking about > here, response or request headers? > > > > response headers. :) > > 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? > > 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. But a 304 is very different from the other redirect status codes (see <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-25.html#rfc.section.6.4>); you can't just "another one". Best regards, Julian
Received on Wednesday, 4 December 2013 15:05:48 UTC