Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:116726
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <5d2b1d8f-9b7a-558f-8750-cc97b3ad0589@gmx.de> <CA+p1FaaAb4Oa2tX8tgnnSERobwBa0MTU42QoJ4v6x-i3JB2yyA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+p1FaaAb4Oa2tX8tgnnSERobwBa0MTU42QoJ4v6x-i3JB2yyA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2021 12:47:07 +0000
Message-ID: <CAKxcST_Xv4QFFh4VfDE9oD9C1gi8r+UQWwRbXoxiXMMA3C-YJw@mail.gmail.com>
To: David Gebler <davidgebler@gmail.com>
Cc: "Christoph M. Becker" <cmbecker69@gmx.de>, PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>, 
	Jakub Zelenka <bukka@php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000004c1b4f05d3cfa379"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] header() allows arbitrary status codes
From: dragoonis@gmail.com (Paul Dragoonis)

--0000000000004c1b4f05d3cfa379
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

On Thu, 23 Dec 2021, 00:06 David Gebler, <davidgebler@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 6:59 PM Christoph M. Becker <cmbecker69@gmx.de>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > a while ago it has been reported[1] that our header() function actually
> > allows arbitrary status codes, which may even overflow.  Of course, that
> > makes no sense, since the status code is supposed to be a three digit
> > code.  So this ticket has been followed up by a pull request[2], and
> > Jakub suggested to further restrict the status code to be in range 100 -
> > 599.
> >
>
> Personally, I don't like restricting the status code to a number in the
> 100-599 range. As far as I know, RFC 7230 doesn't mandate anything beyond
> the requirement of 3 digits and while 7231 may only specify semantics for
> 1xx-5xx, that doesn't mean there isn't a legitimate use-case in custom or
> internal applications for status codes outside the usual semantics.
>
> The overflow part is a legit bug which can and should be fixed, but I'd at
> least question whether a user should be obliged to stick to conventional
> HTTP semantics via the header() function, or even a strictly conformant
> implementation of the standards defined 7320. Maybe this behaviour could be
> default but overridable via a new, fourth optional parameter or something,
> I don't know...but I can easily imagine someone having a legitimate context
> in which they want to send status codes outside the usual range
> representing custom semantics.
>


I think its safe to say we should restrict the overflow parts.

As for boundaries; I don't know who is or isn't using their own custom
status codes. It's unlikely, but entirely possible. As such, this is
considered a BC break.

If we apply restrictions to a minor release, then upgrading will be harder
for 8.2 if we include this in the next release.

You could say 98% of people are using standard ranges for status codes, but
we do have to always take into account the 2% on our decisions.

Thanks.




>
> >
> > Since this could break some pathological cases, I wanted to ask whether
> > anybody objects to this change for the master branch (i.e. PHP 8.2).
> >
> > [1] <https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=81645>
> > [2] <https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/7676>
> >
> > Christoph
> >
> > --
> > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> > To unsubscribe, visit: https://www.php.net/unsub.php
> >
> >
>

--0000000000004c1b4f05d3cfa379--