[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-431?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13107254#comment-13107254
]
Robert Newson commented on COUCHDB-431:
---------------------------------------
"not to @rnewson : i would appreciate that rather than putting comments based
on philosophy or business we talk about code and lines to fix or eventually
change. thanks."
I'm unsure as to what you are referring to here, could you quote the words of
mine you are referring to? My last comment asked a specific question about a
quoted part of your patch, I thought it was quite polite. I'm baffled by the
determination to find hostility in comments that appear to contain none. I
certainly intend none, I just want to understand the security implications of
this change before it is included in an official release.
> Support cross domain XMLHttpRequest (XHR) calls by implementing Access
> Control spec
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: COUCHDB-431
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-431
> Project: CouchDB
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: HTTP Interface
> Affects Versions: 0.9
> Reporter: James Burke
> Assignee: Benoit Chesneau
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 1.2
>
> Attachments: 0001-cors-support.-should-fix-COUCHDB-431-2.patch,
> 0001-cors-support.-should-fix-COUCHDB-431.patch,
> 0001-cors-support.-should-fix-COUCHDB-431.patch,
> 0001-cors-support.-should-fix-COUCHDB-431.patch,
> 0001-cors-support.-should-fix-COUCHDB-431.patch,
> A_0001-Generalize-computing-the-appropriate-headers-for-any.patch,
> A_0002-Send-server-headers-for-externals-responses.patch,
> A_0003-Usably-correct-w3c-CORS-headers-for-valid-requests.patch,
> A_0004-Respond-to-CORS-preflight-checks-HTTP-OPTIONS.patch, cors.html,
> cors_test.html, test_cors2-1.tgz, test_cors2.tgz
>
>
> Historically, browsers have been restricted to making XMLHttpRequests (XHRs)
> to the same origin (domain) as the web page making the request. However, the
> latest browsers now support cross-domain requests by implementing the Access
> Control spec from the W3C:
> http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/access-control/
> In order to keep older servers safe that assume browsers only do same-domain
> requests, the Access Control spec requires the server to opt-in to allow
> cross domain requests by the use of special HTTP headers and supporting some
> "pre-flight" HTTP calls.
> Why should CouchDB support this: in larger, high traffic site, it is common
> to serve the static UI files from a separate, differently scaled server
> complex than the data access/API server layer. Also, there are some API
> services that are meant to be centrally hosted, but allow API consumers to
> use the API from different domains. In these cases, the UI in the browser
> would need to do cross domain requests to access CouchDB servers that act as
> the API/data access server layer.
> JSONP is not enough in these cases since it is limited to GET requests, so no
> POSTing or PUTing of documents.
> Some information from Firefox's perspective (functionality available as of
> Firefox 3.5):
> https://developer.mozilla.org/en/HTTP_access_control
> And information on Safari/Webkit (functionality in latest WebKit and Safari
> 4):
> http://developer.apple.com/safari/library/documentation/AppleApplications/Conceptual/SafariJSProgTopics/Articles/XHR.html
> IE 8 also uses the Access Control spec, but the requests have to go through
> their XDomainRequest object (XDR):
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc288060%28VS.85%29.aspx
> and I thought IE8 only allowed GET or POST requests through their XDR.
> But as far as CouchDB is concerned, implementing the Access Control headers
> should be enough, and hopefully IE 9 will allow normal xdomain requests via
> XHR.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
