Re: GET and referer security considerations

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: David W. Morris: "Re: ISSUE PROXY-AUTHORIZATION: Proposal wording"
• Previous message: Jeffrey Mogul: "Interesting stats on the prevalence of bogus Last-Modified times"
• In reply to: Patrick McManus: "Re: GET and referer security considerations"
• Next in thread: Siew Sim: "Re: GET and referer security considerations"

On Thu, 3 Jul 1997, Patrick McManus wrote:

> David is correct here of course.. but this does bring the
> safe-post/get-w-body/safe-uahint questions back to the table.
> 
> what's the status of draft-ietf-http-uahint-00.txt with respect to
> 2068?

Well it was discussed briefly at the Memphsis IETF, there appeared to
be a lot of interest in the general ideas and at least it sounded like
no interest in coupling SAFE and UAHINT but rather letting them proceed
separately.

Perhaps I should have stirred the pot when we returned?

Dave

• Next message: David W. Morris: "Re: ISSUE PROXY-AUTHORIZATION: Proposal wording"
• Previous message: Jeffrey Mogul: "Interesting stats on the prevalence of bogus Last-Modified times"
• In reply to: Patrick McManus: "Re: GET and referer security considerations"
• Next in thread: Siew Sim: "Re: GET and referer security considerations"