- From: John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org>
- Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 14:38:31 -0500
- To: "Rice, Ed (ProCurve)" <ed.rice@hp.com>
- Cc: www-tag@w3.org
Rice, Ed (ProCurve) scripsit: > For example, on the news source > outlined in the post it clear that a news story doesn't need to use > SHTML but if the user hasn't authenticated it would be easy to redirect > the user to a login page and I do think that login page should use > SHTML. Once the user has authenticated, the content may or may not > raise to the level of secure content and if not straight HTML in fact > would be preferable. I assume s/HTML/HTTP/. In any case, basic HTTP authentication has no concept of a "login page"; every request bears the authentication headers except the first one, which fails with a 403. My present employer deploys RSS feeds under basic authentication, for example, where there would be no way to handle a login page if it did exist. > So, what John's article doesn't say is 'yeah, I think its ok to pass > passwords around in clear text' I believe he's saying 'only secure what > you need to'.. I don't disagree with the latter. (John correct me if > I've miss-read). No, I do affirm that passing around passwords in clear text may be good enough in particular cases, just as signs that say "UNAUTHORIZED PERSONNEL KEEP OUT" may be enough, or easily-forced pin-tumbler locks, or any number of other easily defeated technologies. -- Some people open all the Windows; John Cowan wise wives welcome the spring cowan@ccil.org by moving the Unix. http://www.ccil.org/~cowan --ad for Unix Book Units (U.K.) (see http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/cs/who/dmr/unix3image.gif)
Received on Wednesday, 15 November 2006 21:00:31 UTC