|There's more than one way to do things|
Re: Re: Re: HTACCES & Cookiesby stevenc (Novice)
|on Jun 26, 2002 at 13:35 UTC||Need Help??|
I don't claim to be an expert in anything. Thus I don't believe I would be able to do a CGI authentication routine better than the Apache programmers.
You mean the HTTP protocol, not ASF developers. They've just implemented the protocol, not designed the auth routine.
About SSL and mod_perl, I preferred not to cite them. I preferred to focus on the intrinsic weaknesses of a self-made CGI authentication against an (already weak) basic authentication.
What are they? Apart from having to code it oneself, I fail to see the shortcomings. Basic auth is already as insecure as can be, it can't get any more insecure unless the CGI replacement is poorly implemented.
I subscribe your opinion on SSL and mod_perl, with a preference for SSL for the same reasons as before: personally I don't think I would be able to do with a self-made mod_perl handler a job better than SSL.
Bit of confusion I think, I never mentioned anything about writing your own SSL substitute in mod_perl, I merely mentioned you could use SSL to prevent evesdropping on the initial login, which in the case of a form would POST username and password details in even clearer (non-base64 encoded) text than basic auth.