RE: URI handling in tomcat 3.2.3

2001-09-21 Thread Marc Saegesser
son Hunter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 5:13 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: URI handling in tomcat 3.2.3 > > > You only use http:// in the GET request if you're talking to a proxy > server. That's probably why you got the bad

Re: URI handling in tomcat 3.2.3

2001-09-20 Thread Jason Hunter
riginal Message- > > From: Marc Saegesser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 8:48 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: URI handling in tomcat 3.2.3 > > > > > > I agree that this U

Re: URI handling in tomcat 3.2.3

2001-09-20 Thread Jason Hunter
can be decoded URLDecoder.decode() into > http://URLInPathInfo. > > Comments? > > Marc Saegesser > > > -Original Message- > > From: Marc Saegesser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 12:49 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: URI handling in tomcat 3.2.3

2001-09-20 Thread Marc Saegesser
urn path info that can be decoded URLDecoder.decode() into http://URLInPathInfo. Comments? Marc Saegesser > -Original Message- > From: Marc Saegesser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 12:49 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: URI handling

RE: URI handling in tomcat 3.2.3

2001-09-13 Thread Larry Isaacs
-Original Message- > From: Bill Barker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 12:36 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: URI handling in tomcat 3.2.3 > > > While 3.3 has this behavior as the default, it can be > disabled in the conf

Re: URI handling in tomcat 3.2.3

2001-09-13 Thread cmanolache
On Thu, 13 Sep 2001, Lars Oppermann wrote: > > I agree that this URI handling sucks. I'm the one that > > committed the change that made it happen and I still > > think it sucks. However, allowing these encoded characters > > opens some very large security problems. > > From what I understand,

RE: URI handling in tomcat 3.2.3

2001-09-13 Thread Marc Saegesser
ptember 13, 2001 9:23 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: URI handling in tomcat 3.2.3 > > > Hi Marc, > > Thanks for you reply... > > Marc Saegesser wrote: > > I agree that this URI handling sucks. I'm the one that > > committed the change tha

Re: URI handling in tomcat 3.2.3

2001-09-13 Thread Bill Barker
While 3.3 has this behavior as the default, it can be disabled in the config by: Since the release is scheduled to happen by the end of the month, you might consider jumping straight to 3.3. - Original Message - From: "Lars Oppermann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMA

Re: URI handling in tomcat 3.2.3

2001-09-13 Thread Lars Oppermann
Hi Marc, Thanks for you reply... Marc Saegesser wrote: > I agree that this URI handling sucks. I'm the one that > committed the change that made it happen and I still > think it sucks. However, allowing these encoded characters > opens some very large security problems. From what I unders

RE: URI handling in tomcat 3.2.3

2001-09-13 Thread Marc Saegesser
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: URI handling in tomcat 3.2.3 > > > I agree that this URI handling sucks. I'm the one that committed > the change > that made it happen and I still think it sucks. However, allowing these > encoded characters opens some very large security prob

RE: URI handling in tomcat 3.2.3

2001-09-13 Thread Marc Saegesser
I agree that this URI handling sucks. I'm the one that committed the change that made it happen and I still think it sucks. However, allowing these encoded characters opens some very large security problems. Also, even if TC 3.2.x allowed these characters, the resulting URL wouldn't be portable