You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@shindig.apache.org by "Vincent Siveton (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2008/05/04 14:46:55 UTC

[jira] Created: (SHINDIG-226) Expires date should respect the format given by rfc2616-sec3#sec3.3.1

Expires date should respect the format given by rfc2616-sec3#sec3.3.1
---------------------------------------------------------------------

                 Key: SHINDIG-226
                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHINDIG-226
             Project: Shindig
          Issue Type: Bug
          Components: Gadget Rendering Server (Java)
            Reporter: Vincent Siveton


The actual DateFormat implementation in BasicContentCache doesn't respect formats defined in [1]. According [2], it should.

[1] http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec3.html#sec3.3.1
[2] http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec14.html#sec14.21

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


[jira] Commented: (SHINDIG-226) Expires date should respect the format given by rfc2616-sec3#sec3.3.1

Posted by "Kevin Brown (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHINDIG-226?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12594120#action_12594120 ] 

Kevin Brown commented on SHINDIG-226:
-------------------------------------

The third format is never present in Expires headers, because both HTTP 1.0 and HTTP 1.1 forbid it. The recommendation in 3.3.1 refers to general date formats. Under absolutely no circumstances would the items it references ever apply here, because using the http client to access non-http protocols would be a security hole.

The second format is also probably irrelevant since HTTP 1.1 forbids it and HTTP 1.0 discourages it (and in practice, finding an HTTP 1.0 server that uses this format that was written in the last 10 years is difficult anyway; the lack of a 4 digit year presents a different breed of problem entirely).

So, for this patch to be correct, only the second format should be applied in addition to the first, and only when the connection is HTTP 1.0.

> Expires date should respect the format given by rfc2616-sec3#sec3.3.1
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: SHINDIG-226
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHINDIG-226
>             Project: Shindig
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: Gadget Rendering Server (Java)
>            Reporter: Vincent Siveton
>         Attachments: SHINDIG-226.patch
>
>
> The actual DateFormat implementation in BasicContentCache doesn't respect formats defined in [1]. According [2], it should.
> [1] http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec3.html#sec3.3.1
> [2] http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec14.html#sec14.21

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


[jira] Updated: (SHINDIG-226) Expires date should respect the format given by rfc2616-sec3#sec3.3.1

Posted by "Vincent Siveton (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHINDIG-226?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

Vincent Siveton updated SHINDIG-226:
------------------------------------

    Attachment: SHINDIG-226.patch

Here is a proposed patch with test case.

Note: it uses code from [1], covered by W3C license, which is an Apache approved license.

[1] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2007/mobileok-ref/src/org/w3c/mwi/mobileok/basic/HTTPResource.java

> Expires date should respect the format given by rfc2616-sec3#sec3.3.1
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: SHINDIG-226
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHINDIG-226
>             Project: Shindig
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: Gadget Rendering Server (Java)
>            Reporter: Vincent Siveton
>         Attachments: SHINDIG-226.patch
>
>
> The actual DateFormat implementation in BasicContentCache doesn't respect formats defined in [1]. According [2], it should.
> [1] http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec3.html#sec3.3.1
> [2] http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec14.html#sec14.21

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.