[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Auth]I think I have it... (browser auth interaction: simple and cle

From: John
Subject: Re: [Auth]I think I have it... (browser auth interaction: simple and clean)
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 16:26:57 -0400
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020530

Mario D. Santana wro
In the end, though, I think this browser question is best answered in the
context of a security framework. Like John said, a human-driven browser
is just another webservice, albeit one with interesting characteristics.
So I think we should get a good grasp on DotGNU's auth design before we
worry about this too much.

I heartily agree. Just wanted to record a brainstorm for posterity sake. I also note that this was a clientside front-end proposal. I agree our primary work is on the clientside backend.

Andrew Scherbinsky &co. came up with something he calls Flysolo a while
back, which sounds something like what John is suggesting. I think it's
an excellent solution, it's easy to integrate into existing websites, and
it solves the browser problem as well as it can be solved, IMHO.

No need to be humble. The plugin may very well be the useful piece we take from FlySolo. Remember Freport and MACS aren't the only two products to integrate? ;-)

The primary difference between this and flysolo, was the embedding technique of flysolo was <embed>, which can change the layout of the page; older IE and Netscape allocate at least 1x1 pixel for any embed (no such thing as a 0 pixel embed) to display, which can potentially change a pages format. Also in my consideration was that, IE 6.x supposedly doesn't support embed, but rather uses <object> instead. <link> solves these problems (visual consideration insufficient support)? Someone correct me if I'm wrong... I very well could be.

John Le'Brecage

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]