https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65844

Ruediger Pluem <[email protected]> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Resolution|---                         |INVALID
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED

--- Comment #4 from Ruediger Pluem <[email protected]> ---
I think we need to close the the connection in case the reverse proxy answers
with a final response it got from the backend. See
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7231#page-35:

o  A server that responds with a final status code before reading the
      entire message body SHOULD indicate in that response whether it
      intends to close the connection or continue reading and discarding
      the request message (see Section 6.6 of [RFC7230]).


This should avoid request smuggling attacks as once we send the final response
to the client we don't know if the next data send from the client is the
request body for the previous request or a new request. This is because of 

 o  A client that sends a 100-continue expectation is not required to
      wait for any specific length of time; such a client MAY proceed to
      send the message body even if it has not yet received a response.
      Furthermore, since 100 (Continue) responses cannot be sent through
      an HTTP/1.0 intermediary, such a client SHOULD NOT wait for an
      indefinite period before sending the message body.


at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7231#page-35.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to