Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:94572 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 17668 invoked from network); 18 Jul 2016 22:54:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 18 Jul 2016 22:54:05 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=yohgaki@ohgaki.net; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=yohgaki@ohgaki.net; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain ohgaki.net designates 180.42.98.130 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: yohgaki@ohgaki.net X-Host-Fingerprint: 180.42.98.130 ns1.es-i.jp Received: from [180.42.98.130] ([180.42.98.130:51667] helo=es-i.jp) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id C2/9A-52781-A0E5D875 for ; Mon, 18 Jul 2016 18:54:05 -0400 Received: (qmail 64079 invoked by uid 89); 18 Jul 2016 22:53:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-qt0-f171.google.com) (yohgaki@ohgaki.net@209.85.216.171) by 0 with ESMTPA; 18 Jul 2016 22:53:59 -0000 Received: by mail-qt0-f171.google.com with SMTP id 52so636880qtq.3 for ; Mon, 18 Jul 2016 15:53:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tJWdM3TyEQ6hrWvvMyHeVnm8bQ1VfZi3q+lbrHeAAEezJx4HpGDkeR3iHCT22nLpiYPT4VW7WxsxK2MGg== X-Received: by 10.237.35.76 with SMTP id i12mr18068722qtc.41.1468882432165; Mon, 18 Jul 2016 15:53:52 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.140.85.242 with HTTP; Mon, 18 Jul 2016 15:53:12 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <0f6e21d1-8e0f-aed8-a644-5f7a5aa8dc5e@gmail.com> References: <0f6e21d1-8e0f-aed8-a644-5f7a5aa8dc5e@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2016 07:53:12 +0900 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: To: Stanislav Malyshev Cc: "internals@lists.php.net" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC][VOTE] Enable session.use_strict_mode by default From: yohgaki@ohgaki.net (Yasuo Ohgaki) Hi Stas, On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 7:24 AM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: >> The vote will end in 2 hours and 2 more in favor is required to pass at least. >> >> I don't know the reason why some of us against this RFC, but vote is >> the vote. My guess is you prefer more precise timestamp based session >> managed which has declined. > > The number of votes (7) suggests most people either don't care or don't > understand the issue enough to vote. > > Note that default is not necessary to run a secure setup, strictly > speaking - you can always recommend using non-default setting. It'd be > useful to hear from people voting "no" of course. I agree. We should recommend safer usage. In case if this is not passed, I'll improve the manual. BTW, I wrote some example URLs. http://example.com/ is also vulunerable. Attackers can use httponly and secure attributes. I'm stunned by a browser prefers non-httponly cookie over httponly cookie years ago. In general, http://example.com/ is the safest URL, but not secure. Regards, -- Yasuo Ohgaki yohgaki@ohgaki.net