Re: HTTP/1.0 Authentication

• Date: Sat, 7 Dec 1996 12:42:28 PST
• From:
  "Richard Connamacher" <phantom@baymoo.org>
• Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
• Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

>> If you want to impliment it yourself, just get a uudecode() builtin
>> function, and uudecode the Authorization string, which is then of the
>> form:
>
>Server builtins are completely unnecessary for this.  It's perfectly 
>possible to use in-DB code to decode the Base64 string into the 
>username:password result.  In fact, I wrote exactly such a verb for the 
>BioGate web package currently in use by several MOOs.
>
>It's really depressing when I see everyone always thinking "server 
>builtin" for every little extension which could be done just as 
>effectively in-DB and be far more portable and flexible..

That's true.  We decided to go with a server builtin for speed reasons, and
weren't really worried about portability at the time, and since base64 is
pretty much a constant, it won't have to be reprogrammed any time soon
either.

I'm sorry for implying that you _have_ to code it in server, and I can see
plenty of reasons why coding it in-db would also be good.

Phantom

• PARC projects
• From: clovis harada <clharada@caju.larc.usp.br>

• Prev: Re: HTTP/1.0 Authentication
• Next: I think we need a new mailing list
• Index: MOO-cows
• Thread: MOO-cows