Hi,
> More generally, and regard to the earlier suggestion, I would still suggest
> splitting the http vs https cookie names in any ongoing luci rework in order
> to avoid this situation.
this also has been implemented already, see
https://github.com/openwrt/luci/commit/08fb38399f5b297be7d460703b
On 12/30/22 15:42, Jo-Philipp Wich wrote:
Hi,
[...]
I renamed the new cookies to "http-sysauth" and "https-sysauth", to work
around this and it seems to do the right thing. But there is still a fault
here.
Already fixed with
https://github.com/jow-/lucihttp/commit/6e68a1065f3ed1889e5fa053b
Hi,
> [...]
> I renamed the new cookies to "http-sysauth" and "https-sysauth", to work
> around this and it seems to do the right thing. But there is still a fault
> here.
Already fixed with
https://github.com/jow-/lucihttp/commit/6e68a1065f3ed1889e5fa053b206bd3aa108bd5f
~ Jow
signature.as
On 12/22/22 15:56, Peter Naulls wrote:
On 12/22/22 13:50, Oscar Hjelm wrote:
I’m not familiar with the luci interface, but to help you get started:
- One workaround would be to use a different cookie name on the new secure
cookies (or a new name on the older cookies, if that is preferred). Th
On 12/22/22 13:50, Oscar Hjelm wrote:
I’m not familiar with the luci interface, but to help you get started:
- One workaround would be to use a different cookie name on the new secure
cookies (or a new name on the older cookies, if that is preferred). The two
cookies could co-exist.
Yes, th
Some background. I have two versions of OpenWrt code:
One is legacy version based upon a mismash of versions, but is approximately
luci code from mid-2021. The webserver is http only. I'm able to change this
code for bug fixes, but don't want to pull in anything too large.
The other is bas
