| |||||||||||||
The backdooring of SquirrelMailThe backdooring of SquirrelMailPosted Dec 20, 2007 16:21 UTC (Thu) by gerv (subscriber, #3376)In reply to: The backdooring of SquirrelMail by hickinbottoms Parent article: The backdooring of SquirrelMail
I've been proposing this for some years now - http://www.gerv.net/security/link-fingerprints/ - and we even got as far as a draft RFC but it received a chilly reception from the IETF. :-( Gerv
(Log in to post comments)
link fingerprints Posted Jan 4, 2008 23:32 UTC (Fri) by roelofs (guest, #2599) [Link] I've been proposing this for some years now - http://www.gerv.net/security/link-fingerprints/ - and we even got as far as a draft RFC but it received a chilly reception from the IETF. :-(Why stop with the IETF? This clearly falls equally under the W3C's purvue--at least, if you consider implementing it as additional attributes to the anchor tag rather than welding it to URI syntax. It seems like an almost ideal XHTML or HTML4.x addition. Greg
link fingerprints Posted Jan 5, 2008 12:18 UTC (Sat) by gerv (subscriber, #3376) [Link] I wanted to make it part of the URI syntax because then it could be used even in non-HTML contexts - for example, in plain-text emails. But yes, perhaps if that's not going to be achievable, we could get a significant proportion of the benefits by going via WHAT-WG or W3C and adding a new attribute to HTML. Gerv
|
|||||||||||||