Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:56678 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 12759 invoked from network); 30 Nov 2011 08:39:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 30 Nov 2011 08:39:01 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=smalyshev@sugarcrm.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=smalyshev@sugarcrm.com; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain sugarcrm.com designates 67.192.241.133 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 67.192.241.133 smtp133.dfw.emailsrvr.com Linux 2.6 Received: from [67.192.241.133] ([67.192.241.133:44928] helo=smtp133.dfw.emailsrvr.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id C9/30-11030-3ABE5DE4 for ; Wed, 30 Nov 2011 03:39:01 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp13.relay.dfw1a.emailsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id F36843D06E7; Wed, 30 Nov 2011 03:38:56 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: OK Received: by smtp13.relay.dfw1a.emailsrvr.com (Authenticated sender: smalyshev-AT-sugarcrm.com) with ESMTPSA id B59D23D06E5; Wed, 30 Nov 2011 03:38:56 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <4ED5EBA0.7020000@sugarcrm.com> Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2011 00:38:56 -0800 Organization: SugarCRM User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111105 Thunderbird/8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Yasuo Ohgaki CC: "internals@lists.php.net" References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Strict Session From: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com (Stas Malyshev) Hi! > Hi all, > > I though I've better to start new thread, since I changed the status > to "Under Discussion". > > This is RFC for making PHP session strict. > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/strict_sessions > > I'll implement DoS protection later, since current patch pretty well > tested and suitable for PHP 5.4/5.3, too. I've checked out the RFC and the patch, and I have couple of notes: 1. Why we need separate validate call in the API? Can't we just do the checks in open/read? 2. Very restrictive limits on session key values don't look useful for me - I know some custom solutions use characters beyond alphanumerics in session IDs. Of course it can be worked around with encoding, etc. - but what does it add? 3. Why replacing php_session_create_id with custom functions doing the same in each standard module? 4. I'm not feeling very comfortable getting such a big change (API change, logic change, etc.) with unknown effects this late in 5.4. I'd much better prefer doing it in 5.4.1 but API change doesn't really allow that either. -- Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ (408)454-6900 ext. 227