Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis
Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org> Sun, 10 June 2007 21:10 UTC
Return-path: <discuss-bounces@apps.ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com)
by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
id 1HxUg0-0000vX-HW; Sun, 10 Jun 2007 17:10:20 -0400
Received: from discuss by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43)
id 1HxUg0-0000vS-0s for discuss-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org;
Sun, 10 Jun 2007 17:10:20 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org)
by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HxUfz-0000vK-Mv
for discuss@apps.ietf.org; Sun, 10 Jun 2007 17:10:19 -0400
Received: from laweleka.osafoundation.org ([204.152.186.98])
by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HxUfx-0003iZ-W5
for discuss@apps.ietf.org; Sun, 10 Jun 2007 17:10:19 -0400
Received: from localhost (laweleka.osafoundation.org [127.0.0.1])
by laweleka.osafoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 767A7142204;
Sun, 10 Jun 2007 14:10:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new and clamav at osafoundation.org
Received: from laweleka.osafoundation.org ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (laweleka.osafoundation.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new,
port 10024)
with ESMTP id yrXEDI38OveR; Sun, 10 Jun 2007 14:10:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.100] (unknown [74.95.2.169])
(using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by laweleka.osafoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E497142202;
Sun, 10 Jun 2007 14:10:14 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <1181342059.4818.63.camel@henriknordstrom.net>
References: <BA772834-227A-4C1B-9534-070C50DF05B3@mnot.net>
<392C98BA-E7B8-44ED-964B-82FC48162924@mnot.net>
<6AE049B9045C00064222693F@[10.1.110.5]>
<1181250794.24162.109.camel@henriknordstrom.net>
<46696B98.1090201@cisco.com>
<1181342059.4818.63.camel@henriknordstrom.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.3)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-43--808334052
Message-Id: <8DD2BD5A-9068-43C3-973E-382FAD2E0EA8@osafoundation.org>
From: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org>
Subject: Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis
Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2007 14:10:12 -0700
To: Henrik Nordstrom <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.3)
X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: cd3fc8e909678b38737fc606dec187f0
Cc: Apps Discuss <discuss@apps.ietf.org>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>,
Chris Newman <Chris.Newman@Sun.COM>,
"ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>,
Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
X-BeenThere: discuss@apps.ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: general discussion of application-layer protocols
<discuss.apps.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>,
<mailto:discuss-request@apps.ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:discuss@apps.ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:discuss-request@apps.ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>,
<mailto:discuss-request@apps.ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: discuss-bounces@apps.ietf.org
On Jun 8, 2007, at 3:34 PM, Henrik Nordstrom wrote: > In what way do not Digest fit that? (putting aside the security > concerns > regarding Digest use of MD5 and how) > > What is missing for Digest is some standard means for esablishing the > password without exchaning the password, but it's possible to do such > exchange, at least to a reasonable level. Digest has a bad reputation particularly among Web App developers for a number of reasons, some inherent to the design and specification, some stemming from implementation and deployment choices. http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2003/12/17/dive.html: "most web hosting providers don't turn on digest authentication (it requires an Apache module that is not on by default). Even if Bob's ISP had mod_digest_auth enabled, it wouldn't help Bob, because he has no .htaccess rights to configure his passwords; and, because of the way Apache works, CGIs can't implement digest authentication on their own. (Scripts handled by an Apache module, such as mod_php or mod_perl, can implement HTTP digest authentication. But external CGI processes can't because Apache does not pass the necessary headers along to the CGI script. But that still doesn't help Bob because his hosting provider doesn't offer PHP; and, even if they did, his weblog software doesn't run on PHP anyway.)" http://blogs.msdn.com/drnick/archive/2006/05/12/understanding-http- authentication.aspx: "Digest authentication requires the use of Windows domain accounts. The digest realm indicates the Windows domain name. Due to this, a server running on an operating system that does not support Windows domains, such as Windows XP Home, cannot be used with Digest authentication. When the client is running on an operating system that does not support Windows domains, a domain account must be explicitly specified during the authentication." http://www.imc.org/atom-syntax/mail-archive/msg06103.html: " (1) Some web-servers remove the WWW-Authenticate header before passing it to a CGI program." http://www.imc.org/atom-protocol/mail-archive/msg00836.html: "do all digest and WSSE implementations require server-side access to clear-text passwords or is that just a weakness of the implementations I looked at?" http://www.imc.org/atom-syntax/mail-archive/msg00139.html: "I'm a small site, security is very much a concern and my host does not provide Digest and won't do so." Thus it's hard for an administrator to use today's Web server software and Digest authentication, and still have an application- specific database of usernames/passwords. The server software gets in the way -- it may even be easier for the Web App developer to implement something non-standard like WSSE than have to rely on built- in functions. i18n is also a problem: http://www.agileprogrammer.com/eightytwenty/ archive/2006/05/04/14280.aspx And for humour on the situation: http://bitworking.org/news/ Problems_with_HTTP_Authentication_Interop Lisa
- Straw-man charter for http-bis Mark Nottingham
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Julian Reschke
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Paul Hoffman
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Julian Reschke
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Eliot Lear
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Paul Hoffman
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Julian Reschke
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Paul Hoffman
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Keith Moore
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Julian Reschke
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Julian Reschke
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Julian Reschke
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Mark Nottingham
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Paul Hoffman
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Mark Nottingham
- RE: Straw-man charter for http-bis Larry Masinter
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Keith Moore
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis -- call for er… Mark Nottingham
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Eliot Lear
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Julian Reschke
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis -- call for er… Julian Reschke
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Julian Reschke
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Eliot Lear
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Mark Nottingham
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Eliot Lear
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Julian Reschke
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Eliot Lear
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Julian Reschke
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis -- call for er… Julian Reschke
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis -- call for er… Cyrus Daboo
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Keith Moore
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Mark Nottingham
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis -- call for er… Cyrus Daboo
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Alexey Melnikov
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Alexey Melnikov
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Yves Lafon
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis -- call for er… Robert Sayre
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Robert Sayre
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis -- call for er… Robert Sayre
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis -- call for er… Robert Sayre
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Roy T. Fielding
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis -- call for er… Henrik Nordstrom
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis -- call for er… Henrik Nordstrom
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Robert Sayre
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis -- call for er… Robert Sayre
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Mark Nottingham
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Mark Nottingham
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Mark Nottingham
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Mark Nottingham
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Mark Nottingham
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Keith Moore
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Robert Sayre
- RE: Straw-man charter for http-bis -- call for er… Henrik Nordstrom
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Henrik Nordstrom
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Roy T. Fielding
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Keith Moore
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Keith Moore
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Keith Moore
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Julian Reschke
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis John C Klensin
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Eliot Lear
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Keith Moore
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Keith Moore
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Julian Reschke
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Keith Moore
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Paul Hoffman
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Julian Reschke
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Keith Moore
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Robert Sayre
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Chris Newman
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Julian Reschke
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Alexey Melnikov
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Paul Hoffman
- RFC2616 vs RFC2617, was: Straw-man charter for ht… Julian Reschke
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Keith Moore
- Re: RFC2616 vs RFC2617, was: Straw-man charter fo… Keith Moore
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Julian Reschke
- Re: RFC2616 vs RFC2617, was: Straw-man charter fo… Julian Reschke
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Paul Hoffman
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Eliot Lear
- Re: RFC2616 vs RFC2617, was: Straw-man charter fo… Keith Moore
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Keith Moore
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Keith Moore
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Keith Moore
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Lisa Dusseault
- Re: RFC2616 vs RFC2617, was: Straw-man charter fo… Stephane Bortzmeyer
- Re: RFC2616 vs RFC2617, was: Straw-man charter fo… Joe Orton
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Henrik Nordstrom
- Re: RFC2616 vs RFC2617, was: Straw-man charter fo… lists
- Re: RFC2616 vs RFC2617, was: Straw-man charter fo… lists
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Eliot Lear
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Chris Newman
- Re: RFC2616 vs RFC2617, was: Straw-man charter fo… Chris Newman
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Henrik Nordstrom
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Lisa Dusseault
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Martin Duerst
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Henrik Nordstrom
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Keith Moore
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Julian Reschke
- Re: RFC2616 vs RFC2617, was: Straw-man charter fo… Mark Nottingham
- Re: RFC2616 vs RFC2617, was: Straw-man charter fo… Stephane Bortzmeyer
- Re: RFC2616 vs RFC2617, was: Straw-man charter fo… Adrien de Croy
- Re: RFC2616 vs RFC2617, was: Straw-man charter fo… Stephane Bortzmeyer
- Re: RFC2616 vs RFC2617, was: Straw-man charter fo… tom.petch
- Re: RFC2616 vs RFC2617, was: Straw-man charter fo… Keith Moore
- Re: RFC2616 vs RFC2617, was: Straw-man charter fo… tom.petch
- Re: RFC2616 vs RFC2617, was: Straw-man charter fo… Keith Moore
- Re: RFC2616 vs RFC2617, was: Straw-man charter fo… Mark Nottingham
- Re: RFC2616 vs RFC2617, was: Straw-man charter fo… Adrien de Croy
- Re: RFC2616 vs RFC2617, was: Straw-man charter fo… Chris Newman
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Chris Newman
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Henrik Nordstrom
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis der Mouse
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Keith Moore
- Re: RFC2616 vs RFC2617, was: Straw-man charter fo… tom.petch
- Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis Mark Nottingham
- Character encodings in headers [i74][was: Straw-m… Mark Nottingham
- Re: Character encodings in headers [i74][was: Str… Keith Moore
- Re: Character encodings in headers [i74][was: Str… John C Klensin
- Re: Character encodings in headers [i74][was: Str… Clive D.W. Feather
- Re: Character encodings in headers [i74][was: Str… Martin Duerst
- Re: Character encodings in headers [i74][was: Str… Martin Duerst
- Re: Character encodings in headers [i74][was: Str… Mark Nottingham
- Re: Character encodings in headers [i74][was: Str… Martin Duerst
- Re: Character encodings in headers [i74][was: Str… Mark Nottingham
- Re: Character encodings in headers [i74][was: Str… Clive D.W. Feather
- Re: Character encodings in headers [i74][was: Str… Clive D.W. Feather
- Re: Character encodings in headers [i74][was: Str… Keith Moore
- Re: Character encodings in headers [i74][was: Str… der Mouse
- Re: Character encodings in headers [i74][was: Str… Keith Moore
- Re: Character encodings in headers [i74][was: Str… Stefanos Harhalakis
- Re: Character encodings in headers [i74][was: Str… Keith Moore