PJ Eby added the comment:

The fix for the server looks ok, but the validation and tests must not
be changed, since they void spec compatibility and aren't a bug fix
(and so must not be added to 2.7.)  Indeed, if the validation library
*doesn't* fail on CRLF, then *that* would be a bug, since it's
supposed to tell you about every verifiable spec violation.

Also, simple_server *should* unfold multiline headers, if it's not
already doing so.  (If it's not, it is a bug and can therefore be
fixed in 2.7.)

On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 10:58 AM, Tom Tanner <rep...@bugs.python.org> wrote:
>
> Tom Tanner added the comment:
>
> This is actually more complicated than I initially thought.
> According to 
> https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-3333/#the-start-response-callable
> "Each header_value must not include any control characters, including 
> carriage returns or linefeeds, either embedded or at the end. (These 
> requirements are to minimize the complexity of any parsing that must be 
> performed by servers, gateways, and intermediate response processors that 
> need to inspect or modify response headers.) "
>
> There's a discussion at 
> https://mail.python.org/pipermail/web-sig/2006-September/002244.html
>
> It think the spec should be changed as parsing multi-line headers is really 
> simple and sometimes necessary (e.g., when passing the X.509 client 
> certificate).
>
> Anyway, attached you find a patch for Python 2.7.8 which includes a test and 
> allows CR/LF in header values.
>
> ----------
> Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file37401/wsgi.diff
>
> _______________________________________
> Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
> <http://bugs.python.org/issue21114>
> _______________________________________

----------

_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue21114>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to