Re: [hackers] [quark] Thoughts on CGI and authentication?

2020-10-26 Thread José Miguel Sánchez García
On 10/26/2020 8:41 AM, Laslo Hunhold wrote: Tell me one example where you need CGI which isn't a web forum? To give an example how you can solve something statically: A comment section could be built by having a static web server and also a very thin "handler" that is called when the form is sub

Re: [hackers] [quark][PATCH] Don't erase response on http_send_error_response

2020-10-26 Thread Laslo Hunhold
On Mon, 26 Oct 2020 11:34:17 +0100 José Miguel Sánchez García wrote: Dear José, > > I also don't see a reason for the constraints you mention. Just add > > an array of group-auth-pairs to the server struct and also add a > > group-auth-pair to the req-struct that you then fill when you parse > >

Re: [hackers] [quark][PATCH] Don't erase response on http_send_error_response

2020-10-26 Thread José Miguel Sánchez García
On 10/26/2020 8:34 AM, Laslo Hunhold wrote: Definitely don't make exceptions here, because erasing the entire struct is a consistency measure and being inconsistent there complicates the semantics. I'll be careful then. I also don't see a reason for the constraints you mention. Just add an a

Re: [hackers] [quark] Thoughts on CGI and authentication?

2020-10-26 Thread Laslo Hunhold
On Sun, 25 Oct 2020 18:00:30 +0300 Platon Ryzhikov wrote: Dear Platon, > I've recently had an idea that instead of adding support for running > scripts by HTTP server (which in any case leads to new fork() calls) > one could use a library providing HTTP server itself while all the > logic is cre

Re: [hackers] [quark][PATCH] Don't erase response on http_send_error_response

2020-10-26 Thread Laslo Hunhold
On Sun, 25 Oct 2020 11:04:26 +0100 José Miguel Sánchez García wrote: Dear José, > I'm currently relying on the req struct NOT being erased, because I'm > storing the realm the file belongs to there. Then, I'm using that > realm information to build the WWW-Authenticate header for the 401 > erro