Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I'm saying the consistency that Filippo says our security depends on doesn't really seem to exist in the world, which hurts the persuasiveness of that particular argument in favor of consistency.



But no one expects 0ah to be sufficient. Change that expectation, and now you have to wonder if your middleware and your backend agree on whether the middleware filtered out internal-only headers.


Yeah, I'm not certain that this is a real issue. It might be? Certainly, I'm read in to things like TECL desync. I get the concern, that any disagreement in parsing policies is problematic for HTTP because of middleboxes. But I think the ship may have sailed on 0ah, and that it may be the case that you simply have to build HTTP systems to be bare-0ah-tolerant if you want your system to be resilient.


But what's bare-0ah-tolerant? Accepting _or_ ignoring bare 0ah's means you need to ensure all your moving parts agree, or you end up in the "one bit thinks this is two headers, others think it's one header".

The only situation where you don't need to know two policies match is when one of the policies rejects one of the combinations outright. Probably. Maybe.

EDIT: maybe it's better phrased as "all parts need to be bare-0ah-strict". But then it's fine if it's bare-0ah-reject; they just need to all be strict, one way or the other.


Security also doesn't exist as much as we'd like it to, which doesn't excuse making it exist even less.




Consider applying for YC's Summer 2025 batch! Applications are open till May 13

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: