Matt,

far from getting into RFC debates, but really concerned for the non-server
apps out there, which may not have full control over the network
infrastructure they run on. If I set up my own server(s) at a data center, I
sure can take care of sending you the right referrer and user-agent, but
unfortunately that's not the case in many environments behind firewalls and
/ or proxies.

What's your point on that? I fully understand your intention and the need
for getting some identification - so happy to discuss anything that'll also
work through restricted network access.

Thanks,
Marco

2009/6/16 Matt Sanford <m...@twitter.com>

> Hi there,
>     While all of this flame is keeping my feet warm it's not really
> productive. This isn't Slashdot comments, let's try and remain on topic
> rather the getting into RFC debates. To be even more explicit than my
> previous email: Use the user-agent. Referrer will be taken care of by
> browsers and I see as a fallback for client-side JSON
> users rather than a replacement for a user-agent.
>
>     The subsequent reply from Michael Ivey about how this helps is dead on.
> With no context at all I'm forced to block all of ECS/AppEngine/Yahoo Pipes
> is one person misbehaves. Nobody likes that. Since search is not
> authenticated OAuth does not really help here. We may be forced to make
> search authenticated if we can't find a reasonable way to sort the good from
> the bad. This is a first attempt at helping us cut out poorly build spam
> scripts and shorten the time I spend researching each abuser. It saves time
> and lets me fix more bugs, assuming I don't spend the newly saved time in
> RFC debates, that is :)
>
>   Thanks;
>  – Matt Sanford / @mzsanford
>      Twitter Dev
>
> On Jun 16, 2009, at 12:39 PM, Stuart wrote:
>
> 2009/6/16 Naveen Kohli <naveenko...@gmail.com>
>
>> Redefining HTTP spec, eh :-)
>> Whatever makes twitter boat float. Lets hope for the best. Just concerned
>> that some firewalls or proxies tend to remove "referrer".
>
>
> What a completely ridiculous thing to say. It's not "redefining" anything.
> If Twitter want to require something in order to access their service they
> absolutely have that right. It's not like they're saying every HTTP server
> should start requiring these headers.
>
> It's true that some firewalls and proxies remove the referrer header, and
> some also remove the user agent header.
>
> I'm somewhat unclear on exactly how this stuff is supposed to help. If an
> application sets out to abuse the system they'll simply set the headers so
> they look like a normal browser. I don't see what purpose requiring these
> headers to be something useful will actually serve. IMHO you might as well
> "require" the source parameter for all API requests that use basic auth
> which is simple for all apps to implement; OAuth clearly carries
> identification with it already.
>
> -Stuart
>
> --
> http://stut.net/projects/twitter
>
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 1:05 PM, Stuart <stut...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> It's optional in the HTTP spec, but mandatory for the Twitter Search
>>> API. I don't see a problem with that.
>>>
>>> Doug: Presumably the body of the 403 response will contain a suitable
>>> descriptive error message in the usual format?
>>>
>>> -Stuart
>>>
>>> --
>>> http://stut.net/projects/twitter
>>>
>>> 2009/6/16 Naveen Kohli <naveenko...@gmail.com>:
>>> > Why would you make decision based on "Referrer" which is an OPTIONAL
>>> header
>>> > field in HTTP protocol? Making decision based on something that is
>>> > "REQUIRED" may be more appropriate.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 12:33 PM, Doug Williams <d...@twitter.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> Hi all,
>>> >> The Search API will begin to require a valid HTTP Referrer, or at the
>>> very
>>> >> least, a meaningful and unique user agent with each request. Any
>>> request not
>>> >> including this information will be returned a 403 Forbidden response
>>> code by
>>> >> our web server.
>>> >>
>>> >> This change will be effective within the next few days, so please
>>> check
>>> >> your applications using the Search API and make any necessary code
>>> changes.
>>> >>
>>> >> Thanks,
>>> >> Doug
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Naveen K Kohli
>>> > http://www.netomatix.com
>>> >
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Naveen K Kohli
>> http://www.netomatix.com
>>
>
>
>

Reply via email to