On Wed, 2008-10-22 at 11:52 +0100, sebb wrote:
> On 22/10/2008, Oleg Kalnichevski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2008-10-21 at 20:50 +0100, sebb wrote:
> >  > On 21/10/2008, Oleg Kalnichevski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >  > > On Tue, 2008-10-21 at 13:07 +0100, sebb wrote:
> >  > >  > On 20/10/2008, Oleg Kalnichevski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >  > >  > > On Mon, 2008-10-20 at 09:42 -0700, Joseph Mocker wrote:
> >  > >  > >  > It sounds like your webserver, or whatever is generating & 
> > processing
> >  > >  > >  > the session cookie, is in error. From my reads of RFC2109 & 
> > RFC2068,
> >  > >  > >  > quotes are reserved characters, they are not allowed in the 
> > cookie value.
> >  > >  > >  >
> >  > >  > >  > They say the cookie value can be either
> >  > >  > >  >
> >  > >  > >  >                      token | quoted-string
> >  > >  > >  >
> >  > >  > >  > where
> >  > >  > >  >
> >  > >  > >  >           token          = 1*<any CHAR except CTLs or 
> > tspecials>
> >  > >  > >  >
> >  > >  > >  >           tspecials      = "(" | ")" | "<" | ">" | "@"
> >  > >  > >  >                          | "," | ";" | ":" | "\" | <">
> >  > >  > >  >                          | "/" | "[" | "]" | "?" | "="
> >  > >  > >  >                          | "{" | "}" | SP | HT
> >  > >  > >  >
> >  > >  > >  > and
> >  > >  > >  >
> >  > >  > >  >           quoted-string  = ( <"> *(qdtext) <"> )
> >  > >  > >  >
> >  > >  > >  >           qdtext         = <any TEXT except <">>
> >  > >  > >  >
> >  > >  > >  >
> >  > >  > >  > So in your example, the quoted-string form is used, therefore 
> > the quotes
> >  > >  > >  > are not part of the cookie value.
> >  > >  > >  >
> >  > >  > >  > Perhaps one of the developers can comment?
> >  > >  > >  >
> >  > >  > >
> >  > >  > >
> >  > >  > > Joe,
> >  > >  > >
> >  > >  > >  I second that. The culprit is the broken server side script.
> >  > >  > >
> >  > >  >
> >  > >  > I agree that the quotes are not part of the value, however, I don't
> >  > >  > agree that the server is broken.
> >  > >  >
> >  > >  > RFC 2109 says that the cookie value can be a token, or a quoted
> >  > >  > string. Given that arbitrary white-space is allowed between tokens,
> >  > >  > quotes are required to preserve spaces and any other special
> >  > >  > characters.
> >  > >  >
> >  > >  > In this case the trailing "=" is not allowed in a plain token, but 
> > it
> >  > >  > is allowed in TEXT.
> >  > >  >
> >  > >  > RFC 2068 says:
> >  > >  >
> >  > >  > CTL            = <any US-ASCII control character
> >  > >  >                            (octets 0 - 31) and DEL (127)>
> >  > >  >
> >  > >  > TEXT           = <any OCTET except CTLs,
> >  > >  >                            but including LWS>
> >  > >  >
> >  > >  > So for example the value <Apache HttpClient> would need to be 
> > provided as:
> >  > >  >
> >  > >  > Set-Cookie: Product="Apache HttpClient"
> >  > >  >
> >  > >  >
> >  > >  > and returned to the server as
> >  > >  >
> >  > >  > Cookie: Product="Apache HttpClient"
> >  > >  >
> >  > >  > Likewise, the value <dfgsdfgsdg=> needs to be quoted, both in the
> >  > >  > Set-Cookie and Cookie headers.
> >  > >  >
> >  > >  > It's not clear from RFC2108 whether user agents are allowed to strip
> >  > >  > quotes from values if the quotes are not necessary - i.e. where the
> >  > >  > value is a valid token - but it seems to me that user agents must 
> > not
> >  > >  > strip quotes which are required to ensure that the value is valid.
> >  > >  >
> >  > >  > As far as I can tell, the header:
> >  > >  >
> >  > >  > Cookie:  POSESSIONID=dfgsdfgsdg=
> >  > >  >
> >  > >  > is not valid according to RFC2109 , because the trailing "=" is not
> >  > >  > valid in a token - it has to be quoted as in:
> >  > >  >
> >  > >  > Cookie:  POSESSIONID="dfgsdfgsdg="
> >  > >  >
> >  > >
> >  > >
> >  > > Well, it is all nice and dandy, and I almost got convinced, but there 
> > is
> >  > >  one little detail. The Set-Cookie header in question violates both
> >  > >  RFC2109 and RFC2965 by not including the mandatory Version attribute.
> >  >
> >  > OK, I'd overlooked that detail.
> >  >
> >  > >  Therefore, all well-behaved HTTP agents MUST treat that cookie as
> >  > >  Netscape compatible. As far as Netscape cookie draft is concerned the
> >  > >  following cookie is perfectly valid, as the spec does not impose any
> >  > >  restrictions on characters used in cookie values:
> >  > >
> >  > >  Cookie: POSESSIONID=dfgsdfgsdg=
> >  > >
> >  >
> >  > I found a copy of the Netscape draft at:
> >  >
> >  > http://curl.haxx.se/rfc/cookie_spec.html
> >  >
> >  > Which says:
> >  >
> >  > >>>
> >  > Set-Cookie: NAME=VALUE; expires=DATE;
> >  > path=PATH; domain=DOMAIN_NAME; secure
> >  >
> >  > NAME=VALUE
> >  > This string is a sequence of characters excluding semi-colon, comma
> >  > and white space. If there is a need to place such data in the name or
> >  > value, some encoding method such as URL style %XX encoding is
> >  > recommended, though no encoding is defined or required.
> >  > <<<
> >  >
> >  > I read this as meaning that  " (double-quote) is valid as a character
> >  > in a Netscape cookie value.
> >  >
> >  > In which case I contend that the server is entitled to send the cookie
> >  > value with quotes in it and to expect the quotes in the cookie to be
> >  > returned by the user agent.
> >
> >
> > Netscape draft leaves a lot of room for different interpretations. I
> >  certainly do not see any reason why the server should reject a cookie
> >  without the quotes in the cookie value. To me, the server script is
> >  still utterly broken.
> >
> 
> My reading of the spec. suggests that the quotes are part of the
> value, in which case it is clearly an error to remove them, and the
> server is correct in not recognising the value.
> 
> As far as I can tell, the Netscape draft does not allow for any form
> of quoting, therefore it is an error to assume that enclosing quotes
> can be removed.
> 

I am not sure I can agree to that. I do not see anything in the draft
suggesting that quoting may be disallowed. Moreover, the draft clearly
states "some encoding method ... is recommended". To me, that clearly
includes quoting. 

Oleg

> 
> >
> >  Oleg
> >
> >
> >  >
> >  > >  So, the server is _badly_ broken form the standpoint of both RFC2109 
> > and
> >  > >  RFC2965, and on top of that it even messes up Netscape compatibility.
> >  > >
> >  >
> >  > It may be broken in terms of the RFCs, but to me it seems to be OK as
> >  > far as the Netscape spec is concerned.
> >  >
> >  > >  Oleg
> >  > >
> >  > >
> >  > >
> >  > >  > >
> >  > >  > >  Oleg
> >  > >  > >
> >  > >  > >
> >  > >  > >  >   --joe
> >  > >  > >  >
> >  > >  > >  >
> >  > >  > >  > Reinhard Pagitsch wrote:
> >  > >  > >  > > Hello to all,
> >  > >  > >  > >
> >  > >  > >  > > From our webserver I get a session cookie in the form
> >  > >  > >  > > POSESSIONID="dfgsdfgsdg="
> >  > >  > >  > > But the HTTPClient sends back the cookie in the form
> >  > >  > >  > > POSESSIONID=dfgsdfgsdg=.
> >  > >  > >  > > Therefore no authentication is done. Is there a way to 
> > configure the
> >  > >  > >  > > HttpClient to send back
> >  > >  > >  > > the session cookie as it is and do no modifications?
> >  > >  > >  > >
> >  > >  > >  > > Thank you,
> >  > >  > >  > > Reinhard
> >  > >  > >  > >
> >  > >  > >  > > 
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >  > >  > >  > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >  > >  > >  > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >  > >  > >  > >
> >  > >  > >  >
> >  > >  > >  >
> >  > >  > >  > 
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >  > >  > >  > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >  > >  > >  > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >  > >  > >  >
> >  > >  > >
> >  > >  > >
> >  > >  > >  
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >  > >  > >  To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >  > >  > >  For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >  > >  > >
> >  > >  > >
> >  > >  >
> >  > >  > 
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >  > >  > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >  > >  > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >  > >  >
> >  > >
> >  > >
> >  > >  ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >  > >  To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >  > >  For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >  > >
> >  > >
> >  >
> >  > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >  > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >  > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >  >
> >
> >
> >  ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >  To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >  For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to