Hello everyone,

Just a note that I've removed a couple of posts from this thread due
to inappropriate comments. This also seems like a good time to remind
everyone that we're here to collaborate and help each other, not to
curse or antagonize anyone.

One of the posts did contain some useful content aside from the
inappropriate bits, which I've posted below to keep the value of the
post on this thread.

Thanks,
-Sumit Chandel

---- Pasted from previous post ---

HTTP Authentication? Don't make me laugh - it's ridiculous design, and
more importantly, users don't get it. at all. They think your app is
broken and try to browse away (only they can't, that authentication
dialog box is modal). There's also no better security there than what
you can do with cookies, as it boils down to sending the username and
password in plain text to the server. I know, I know, its base64
encoded so it doesn't look like it on first glance, but -any- sniffer
-
anywhere- can see that its a Authorization header and de-base64 it.
It's the same thing from a security perspective.

There really is no problem here. If your developer can serve the
content without knowing the user's session information (which
presupposes that the session ID was checked and validated in the first
place), then its rather unlikely to be relevant,security wise. In
corporate settings there are some exceptions (downloading static
files / global uncustomized information which is still not meant for
outside eyes), but not too many.

On Nov 19, 5:54 am, "olivier nouguier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Walden,
>
> See below, please.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 2:29 PM, walden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Olivier,
>
> > I'm still a little perplexed, see below.
>
> >> >>  * session expiration, because the GWT RPC will fail soon (401).
> >> >>  * forbiden because the GWT RPC will fail soon (403).
>
> >> When session is expired, the RPC will fail soon with a 401 (Auth
> >> required status), before GWT 1.5 it was not (easily ) possible to
> >> detect such failure. But session expiration is not an issue forHTTP
> >> basic.>>  * activation of widget when authority is granted.
>
> > Originally, I thought your points were againstHTTPauth, but now it
> > looks like they were for it?
>
> I'm not talking ofHTTPBasic Scheme where AFAIK there is no
> expiration. I'm talking of Session Base mecanism like Acegi or Form
> Based authentication.
>
> What I was (trying) to explain is that when relying on a previous
> authentication, then the GWT application is in fact unaware of being
> under a restricted access. That might be a good (as it simple). But
> when an error (security errorsAuthRequired (401) when session has
> expired , a forbidden access (403)) occurs on a GWT-RPC call  the GWT
> application has to handle this error (much simpler under GWT >= 1.5).
>
> So the GWT application has to handle some security concern (Auth
> required && Forbidden).
>
>
>
> >> About widget activation && authorization, I my proposal the widget are
> >> aware of the authentication events so they can activate/desactivate
> >> when login/logout occurs.
>
> > This doesn't come up for me.  I secure my site in such a way that you
> > don't get any widgets until you're authenticated and authorized.  I
> > thought you were referring to a more fine grained authorization scheme
> > where certain widgets appear only for certain users.
>
> I do ! Some GWT element may be notified for the authentication event
> (granted authorities) and then they can do what they want ...
>
>
>
> >That sort of
> > entitlement management goes beyond authorization, and the point I was
> > making was that it seems somewhat orthogonal to what protocol you use
> > forauth.
> Definitively !
>
> > Walden
>
> Regards
> Olivier.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Google Web Toolkit" group.
To post to this group, send email to Google-Web-Toolkit@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to