• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    12 years ago

    …so allow…either?

    What’s so hard about checking two headers (Authorization: and Cookie:) for the authtoken?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      12 years ago

      It’s a security thing. The HttpOnly cookie can’t be stolen using XSS or something like that, while a bearer token must be stored somewhere where javascript can see it.

      • lemmyvore
        link
        fedilink
        English
        12 years ago

        That’s assuming the client wants to make a web app. They may need to connect something else to that API.

        It’s perfectly normal to be able to cater to more authentication scenarios than “web app logging in directly to the target API and using its cookies”.

        If they want to make a web app they should use the cookie mechanism but ultimately each client app is responsible for how it secures its access.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        12 years ago

        Then again, cookie auth is vulnerable to CSRF. Pick your poison.

        Although CSRF protection just adds a minor inconvenience, while there is never a guarantee your code is XSS vulnerability free.