full-disclosure - another product affected by recent MS IE '@' patch

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]

Message-ID: <20040209115919.GA46589@gvr.gvr.org>
From: guido at gvr.org (Guido van Rooij)
Subject: another product affected by recent MS IE '@' patch

On Mon, Feb 09, 2004 at 10:42:18AM +1300, Nick FitzGerald wrote:
> Section 3.2.2:
> 
>    http_URL = "http:" "//" host [ ":" port ] [ abs_path [ "?" query ]]
> 
> You then have to refer back to RFC 2396 -- coincidentally also section 
> 3.2.2 of that RFC -- for the definitions of the component parts "host" 
> and "port" ("abs_path", etc are irrelevant to this discussion and 
> defined in other sections of 2396).
> 
> There you will see that "host" is a sub-part of the "hostport" part of 
> the "server" component of generic URIs:
> 
>    server        = [ [ userinfo "@" ] hostport ]
> 
>    hostport      = host [ ":" port ]
> 
> and, most importantly, you should note that the "userinfo" part is 
> _outside_ the definition of "hostport", and thus outside the "host" 
> part.  Ergo, HTTP URLs are explicitly (and presumably deliberately) 
> defined to _NOT_ support "userinfo" data so any implementation that 
> does is non-compliant.

Following the same reasoning, the HTTP URLs are also "deliberately" defined
to not support port numbers. I fail to believe that this was intentional.

-Guido