On Fri, Apr 22, 2005 at 09:11:28AM +0100, Chris Withers wrote:
| Sidnei da Silva wrote:
|
| Well, my use-case is actually for WebDAV. So you won't just visit a
| different part of the site at random. I'm currently trying to
| understand if this would be a problem for WebDAV too.
|
|
On 4/21/05, Chris Withers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If it's accessible by anonymous that is the same as not requiring
authorization.
I don't think that's the case. I have a specific requirement on the
project I'm currently working on to know who the current user is, even
if the something
On 4/20/05, Sidnei da Silva [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Supposedly you would not be able to access that part of the site until
you authenticate against it. Isn't that the case now?
Assuming it requires authentication, yes.
The main problem here is that Internet Explorer doesn't allow you to
log
Lennart Regebro wrote:
Supposedly you would not be able to access that part of the site until
you authenticate against it. Isn't that the case now?
Assuming it requires authentication, yes.
And if it doesn't require authentication?
Also, what determines whether it requires authentication?
On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 06:22:10PM +0200, Lennart Regebro wrote:
On 4/20/05, Chris Withers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Lennart Regebro wrote:
Supposedly you would not be able to access that part of the site until
you authenticate against it. Isn't that the case now?
Assuming it requires
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 12:09 pm, Sidnei da Silva wrote:
- If you want to access a anonymous page, you will *not* be sending
auth credentials.
Why do you say that? Cooke auth doesn't distinguish between anonymous pages
and pages that require a user,
