Re: lynx-dev problems w/ remarq

[Klaus Weide]

On Wed, 9 Jun 1999, Doug Kaufman wrote:

> On Thu, 10 Jun 1999, Henry Nelson wrote:
> 
> > Is anyone keeping an FAQ anymore?  An exchange between Doug and Klaus
> > soon after Fote's mod makes it very clear what is happening (recommended
> > reading):
> >    http://www.flora.org/lynx-dev/html/month1197/msg00007.html
> >    http://www.flora.org/lynx-dev/html/month1197/msg00015.html
> 
> I was never able to get that site to change, despite email and even
> personal discussion (I met the owner of the website at a convention).
> If I want to access that site, it means compiling a less secure
> version of lynx.

I guess it's time to make the behavior configurable, and introduce
another option:

 REFERER_WITH_QUERY:[SEND|DROP|PARTIAL]

 SEND is the behavior before the change mentioned earlier in the thread
 was introduced (no special handling).  DROP is the current behavior.
 PARTIAL would send a Referer-URL cut off at (or after?) the question
 mark.

 DROP behavior isn't strictly correct, but should satisfy the requirements
 of the sites in question, and also protect potentially private data from
 exposure.

I may do a patch for this, but will wait till Tom has done something with
my big patch (it shifts the place for Referer checking in LYGetFile.c
around).

All this isn't very satisfactory - those sites are basically broken.
Effectively they make the Referer a part of a page's address, Lynx of
course doesn't treat it that way.  For example when a page is re-loaded
because of going back in history, the original Referer header isn't
available any more.

   Klaus