From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Maxime Devos Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: [PATCH] web: authorization header scheme should be capitalized Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2022 10:35:14 +0200 Message-ID: <32d2790b6941f5bf5b9185bd1fc9f46d90fcc85e.camel@telenet.be> References: <20220623202759.3578506-1-aconchillo@gmail.com> <922957d6545149287a6aec7b9d258bf2dd7603ef.camel@telenet.be> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-Mi98jl9fSlet4V9dLxQh" Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="14087"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Evolution 3.38.3-1 Cc: guile-devel To: Aleix Conchillo =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Flaqu=E9?= Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Jun 24 10:53:57 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1o4f4f-0003T3-CB for guile-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 24 Jun 2022 10:53:57 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:57836 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o4f4d-0007I4-TW for guile-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 24 Jun 2022 04:53:55 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:41132) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o4eml-0007P4-NB for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Jun 2022 04:35:30 -0400 Original-Received: from baptiste.telenet-ops.be ([2a02:1800:120:4::f00:13]:42352) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o4emi-0006d2-JE for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Jun 2022 04:35:27 -0400 Original-Received: from ptr-bvsjgyhxw7psv60dyze.18120a2.ip6.access.telenet.be ([IPv6:2a02:1811:8c09:9d00:3c5f:2eff:feb0:ba5a]) by baptiste.telenet-ops.be with bizsmtp id mwbE2700L4UW6Th01wbE4W; Fri, 24 Jun 2022 10:35:14 +0200 In-Reply-To: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=telenet.be; s=r22; t=1656059714; bh=8FVFBmJJBvLMqJGcECpQFLf2mzJtf5MPgbkO7tWUUY4=; h=Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References; b=a0few27Q0XXLMOT3piiSAjZL5zzkzQngKaZIrGZLSF7LVRhvIr/Tu6f9cDX+JzTQe b6fAab2G5ipexJlpYBvrKrm8XuIpKjL/rg+briZ6zvFc/VC18bXxLtMJ+ANqoef/DS bIZG3ee5WM86MsvOTASErg1fNGzoJ8ycKDwuGSwVFbHkLSqr8cQ28ntelf3caaOx7X gUuwN9exAJIGJs1R/Fehxk3YI4OcM2fYQpV9Tnj/ngfoDRI2l1SMLJsW7OQ+TDzrhI ++/PG8Knqpx3nuPH90OPZyDD8SxDGApYDevBVQmpfbg/NfuiRoG8gPhFnsEVMJ3yHE uzBGEbZfc+KNQ== Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a02:1800:120:4::f00:13; envelope-from=maximedevos@telenet.be; helo=baptiste.telenet-ops.be X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "guile-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.lisp.guile.devel:21234 Archived-At: --=-Mi98jl9fSlet4V9dLxQh Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Aleix Conchillo Flaqu=C3=A9 schreef op do 23-06-2022 om 18:46 [-0700]: > Ah, got it. Yes, that would make sense. >=20 > I was thinking about it again. I know that Guile complies with the > standard but since, I would say, capitalized schemes is what most > libraries use, would it make sense to switch to that? I don't really > expect big companies to fix this kind of stuff fast and in the > meantime we can't use Guile for certain things. I have to say I've > never seen lowercase Authorization header schemes. As long as we remember to _also_ report the bug in the buggy =E2=80=98consumers=E2=80=99 of the header (in this case, those big companie= s) and remember that lower-case isn't buggy, switching to the more conventional title-case seems sensible to me. Greetings, Maxime. --=-Mi98jl9fSlet4V9dLxQh Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iI0EABYKADUWIQTB8z7iDFKP233XAR9J4+4iGRcl7gUCYrV3QhccbWF4aW1lZGV2 b3NAdGVsZW5ldC5iZQAKCRBJ4+4iGRcl7qT3AP9c3Fds0mXWV7W0kNevCXcxkQjg GP0/WzRFRr0mKwQ/HwD/W1mwOOVUXUD33MyUzoLLYO8Y0fuGVRH9IKVQrgpVmAQ= =uNE4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-Mi98jl9fSlet4V9dLxQh--