Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Wed, 28 May 2008 03:10:16 +0200, Jonas Sicking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
While it's true that servers need to be prepared for any type of HTTP
requests already, access-control makes it possible to do them using
other users peoples credentials.
So while we don't need to worry about "bad things happen when this
HTTP request is sent", we do need to worry about "bad things can
happen when this HTTP request is sent by a user with root credentials".
Yes, that's why we have Access Control in the first place.
Exactly.
We had Allow
at some point in the past and we decided it was not needed. Why do you
suddenly think it is needed again?
Last time I thought about it in terms of a feature. I.e. as a way for
the server to choose which other servers could perform what actions.
However IMHO it makes more sense as an extra level of security. To deal
with servers supporting actions that the server administrator is unaware
of or wasn't thinking of when enabling Access-Control.
Further, the way we controlled methods before was much more complex than
my proposal. Different sites could have different allowed methods. We
had to issue new prefligh requests every time a new method was used. The
syntax allowed for DELETE being listed as an allowed method when we
checked for POST, but then DELETE wouldn't actually be allowed when we
checked for DELETE, etc.
The new proposal is much simpler. Both syntax wise for the server
administrator, and for the implementation.
/ Jonas
