----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Thomas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Tomcat Developers List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2003 4:09 PM Subject: RE: DO NOT REPLY [Bug 13861] - Authentication / SSL conflict (web.xml security-constraint auth-constraint user-data-constraint)
> All, > > I would like to write a patch for this bug but before I do I have a few > questions > I would value your opinions on: > > 1. If the root cause is an IE but, should we do anything? I don't have a strong opinion either way on this. > 2. If we do make a change, is it reasonable to modify > org.apache.coyote.http11.Http11Processor.parseHost() > to always use the port from the associated socket. I am afraid I do not know > enough > about the specs to answer this one. This one is really bad. It breaks way more things than it fixes (e.g. hardware load-balancers, proxy-servers). > 3. Is there a better fix? Looking at the discussion on #13861, it seems at it is enough to simply (for the special case of FORM only, since it is clearly wrong to do this for BASIC), reverse the order of the checks for user-data and auth-constraint. Then a request for http://server:8080/myapp/protected/ would first go to http://server:8080/myapp/protected/Login.html and then to https://server:8443/myapp/protected/Login.html. As I understand it this should work with MSIE (but I haven't tried it myself). It's easy enough to do a quick hack to test it: Just swap the calls to checkUserData and authenticate in AuthenticatorBase. > > My own view is that we should do something to help our users even if it isn't > strictly > our fault. Trying to get Microsoft to fix it is a waste of time in my view. > I've tried > that route before with no success. > > Thanks in anticipation for your responses, > > Mark > > DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG > RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT > <http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13861>. > ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND > INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. > > http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13861 > > Authentication / SSL conflict (web.xml security-constraint auth-constraint > user-data-constraint) > > > > > > ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2003-07-17 23:04 > ------- > As far as I can tell this is an IE bug. Using the snoop example, Tomcat first > redirects to SSL and then performs a second redirect to the form login jsp. > The response sent by IE to the first redirect comes in on port 8443 but the > request headers refer to port 8080 (read in > org.apache.coyote.http11.Http11Processor.parseHost()). This causes the second > redirect to fail because the port in the request is used when constructing the > second redirect. > > You will not see this problem if the standard ports are used because Tomcat > defaults to these if the port is not specified in the headers. > > Work arounds are as suggested in the previous posts > 1. Use the standard ports > 2. Use a two stage re-direct > > I'll start a discussion on the developers list to gather opinions as to what, > if anything, we should do about what looks very much like an IE bug. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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] >
This message is intended only for the use of the person(s) listed above as the intended recipient(s), and may contain information that is PRIVILEGED and CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not an intended recipient, you may not read, copy, or distribute this message or any attachment. If you received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and then delete all copies of this message and any attachments. In addition you should be aware that ordinary (unencrypted) e-mail sent through the Internet is not secure. Do not send confidential or sensitive information, such as social security numbers, account numbers, personal identification numbers and passwords, to us via ordinary (unencrypted) e-mail.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
