full-disclosure - Microsoft Faces Angry IE Users' Questions

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

From: frank at knobbe.us (Frank Knobbe)
Subject: Microsoft Faces Angry IE Users' Questions

On Sat, 2004-07-10 at 23:58, Eric Paynter wrote:
> I'm a little confused by what you mean here. The "user:pwd@" prefix is a
> part of the URI standard documented in the RFC. As far as I can tell, the
> patently incorrect part is that they removed it and thus made the browser
> (even more) lacking in standards support. It's a simple example of how MS
> solves problems:

I believe the issue was that there is no such thing as "user:pwd@" for
http: or any other URI's with the exception of FTP: 

Just because it is described in an RFC for FTP doesn't mean that you can
go ahead and add this capability to everything else that trails a colon.

If you feel otherwise, please show us an RFC that describes "user:pwd@"
for http:.

Regards,
Frank

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.grok.org.uk/pipermail/full-disclosure/attachments/20040711/a63dfed6/attachment.bin