> I wouldn't see it as a step forward where we increase
> the vulnerability of the majority, and the effort needed
> to deal with that, in favor of satisfying a small minority
> that insist on using inherently unsafe escape sequences.
> Maybe this new behavior should be an option like it is in
> Tomcat 3.3.x.  The default is to err on the side of safety.
> Operating in this less safe envrionment could be specifically
> requested via an option, and the user is responsible for
> dealing with the impact.  How does that sound?

Ok, no problem, but there must be a middle ground.

Perhaps the tests (jk_req_util.c/jk_requtil_unescapeUrl) now overreact a
bit, maybe we can tone down the code, just now it barfs on any embedded
'/' %2F, tomcat deals without problems with this issues, and later there
is an agressive uri filtering on ./ and combinations.. maybe is better
to let this pass without problems to tc, and let tomcat deal with it..
tested and it works very well..

How about this way?

In the mean time i'll revert the change.. 

Ignacio J. Ortega 

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

Reply via email to