Edmund Lian wrote:
> On 01/03/2003 04:47:38 PM webware-discuss-admin wrote:
>      >I am looking to have WK be session aware when the client side cannot
> support
>      >Cookies or POSTs (spefically, I am targeting Plucker on the Palm OS).
> Is
>      >this doable/hackable?  Ideas?
> 
> ... is yes. There's a setting in Application.config to turn this on.
> 
> Be aware however, that having the session encoded in the URL makes session
> hijacking easier, and bookmarking harder.

In what way does it make session hijacking easier?  Sure, if you're
unencrypted, someone could see the URL session in the traffic as it
goes by, but the same is true of the _SID_ cookie, isn't it?  So it
would seem that only SSL makes session hijacking hard, and it then
doesn't matter which one you use for security?

If this isn't correct, someone please enlighten me.


-- 
Randall Randall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"[The] poetic justice of cause and effect compels
 respect, compassion." -- Faithless, God is a DJ.



-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
Webware-discuss mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/webware-discuss

Reply via email to