On Monday 05 May 2003 09:52, Seairth Jacobs wrote:
> From: "Tyler Close" <tyler@...>
>
> > Does this mean that you are dropping authorization methods 2 and
> > 5, from Michael Day's list of 5 authorization methods?
>
> Nope. See below.

I don't understand. In the previous email, you agreed that these
methods are vulnerable to a Confused Deputy attack and said that
RNA passes the "user/pwd" in the notification.

> > Does this mean that you are rescinding your opinion that:
> > "Generating URLs containing authentication tokens seems like a Bad
> > Idea"?
>
> Nope. See below.

A "user/pwd" is an authorization token. Are you saying that the
primary authorization mechanism used in RNA is "a Bad Idea"?

As we've discussed, and you've agreed, using a capability URL is
the only way to prevent the Confused Deputy attack. How do you
reconcile this with thinking that a capability URL is "a Bad
Idea"? The agreed facts indicate the exact opposite.

Tyler