httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rodent of Unusual Size <Ken.C...@Golux.Com>
Subject Re: workaround for encoded slashes (%2f)
Date Tue, 14 Jan 2003 16:36:50 GMT
Greg Stein wrote:
> That sounds rather hacky. IMO, Apache should not do any URI decoding.

yes, well, maybe.  and then again, maybe not.  i'm working within the
current framework, not trying to friggin' redesign something that we've
been doing for more than five years.

 > Instead, Apache should figure out who is going to handle
 > the request (i.e. map the identified resource to a handler),
 > then let the handler do whatever processing is appropriate on
 > the URI.

in a more perfect world, i agree.

 > If Apache is going to decode the URI, then it should first
 > split the URI into path segments (an array) and then perform
 > the decoding.

um, trust me: we *do not* want to go there without a massive
rework.  i've spent a lot of time on that.  it gets very, very
messy because different phases may do different things which
make it impossible to deterministically re-assemble the path.
consider mod_rewrite for a moment.

 > But again: URI munging should be left to handlers rather than
 > the core. (altho, of course, the core can provide utilities
 > to those handlers)

that would be wonderful.  unfortunately, we do the decoding
because of the legacy involvement with the filesystem
(directory and file walk).  i agree that a more perfect solution
is to *not* do any decoding and let the various/appropriate
handlers figure out wth they need to do with the raw uri.
but that's not possible until the filesystem access is a true
peer and not a preferential case.
#ken	P-)}

Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini  http://Golux.Com/coar/
Author, developer, opinionist      http://Apache-Server.Com/

"Millennium hand and shrimp!"

View raw message