Http Request and Response
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
HTTP2 Explained
HTTP2 Explained Daniel Stenberg Mozilla Corporation [email protected] ABSTRACT credits to everyone who helps out! I hope to make this document A detailed description explaining the background and problems better over time. with current HTTP that has lead to the development of the next This document is available at http://daniel.haxx.se/http2. generation HTTP protocol: HTTP 2. It also describes and elaborates around the new protocol design and functionality, 1.3 License including some implementation specifics and a few words about This document is licensed under the the future. Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 This article is an editorial note submitted to CCR. It has NOT license: been peer reviewed. The author takes full responsibility for this http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ article’s technical content. Comments can be posted through CCR Online. 2. HTTP Today Keywords HTTP 1.1 has turned into a protocol used for virtually everything HTTP 2.0, security, protocol on the Internet. Huge investments have been done on protocols and infrastructure that takes advantage of this. This is taken to the 1. Background extent that it is often easier today to make things run on top of HTTP rather than building something new on its own. This is a document describing http2 from a technical and protocol level. It started out as a presentation I did in Stockholm in April 2014. I've since gotten a lot of questions about the contents of 2.1 HTTP 1.1 is Huge that presentation from people who couldn't attend, so I decided to When HTTP was created and thrown out into the world it was convert it into a full-blown document with all details and proper probably perceived as a rather simple and straight-forward explanations. -
Improving Packet Caching Scalability Through the Concept Of
IMPROVING PACKET CACHING SCALABILITY THROUGH THE CONCEPT OF AN EXPLICIT END OF DATA MARKER A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Notre Dame in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Computer Science and Engineering by Xiaolong Li, B.S., M.S. ________________________________ Aaron Striegel, Director Graduate Program in Computer Science and Engineering Notre Dame, Indiana July 2006 c Copyright by Xiaolong Li 2006 All Rights Reserved Improving Packet Caching Scalability Through the Concept of an Explicit End of Data Marker Abstract by Xiaolong Li The web has witnessed an explosion of dynamic content generation to provide web users with an interactive and personalized experience. While traditional web caching techniques work well when redundancy occurs on an object-level basis (page, image, etc.), the use of dynamic content presents unique challenges. Although past work has addressed mechanisms for detecting redundancy despite dynamic content, the scalability of such techniques is limited. In this thesis, an effective and highly scalable approach, Explicit End of Data (EEOD) is presented, which allows the content designer to easily signal bound- aries between cacheable and non-cacheable content. EEOD provides application- to-stack mechanisms to guarantee separation of packets with the end goal of sim- plifying packet-level caching mechanisms. Most importantly, EEOD does not re- quire client-side modifications and can function in a variety of server-side/network deployment modes. Additionally, experimental studies are presented, showing EEOD offers 25% and 30% relative improvements in terms of bandwidth efficiency and retrieval time over current approaches in the literature. -
The Common Gateway Interface and Server-Side Programming
WebWeb MasterMaster 11 IFIIFI Andrea G. B. Tettamanzi Université de Nice Sophia Antipolis Département Informatique [email protected] Andrea G. B. Tettamanzi, 2019 1 Unit 3 The Common Gateway Interface and Server-side Programming Andrea G. B. Tettamanzi, 2019 2 Agenda • The Common Gateway Interface • Server-Side Programming Andrea G. B. Tettamanzi, 2019 3 Introduction • An HTTP server is often used as a gateway to a different information system (legacy or not), for example – an existing body of documents – an existing database application • The Common Gateway Interface (CGI) is an agreement between HTTP server implementors about how to integrate such gateway scripts and programs • It was typically (but not exclusively) used in conjunction with HTML forms to build database applications • Nowadays largely superseded by dynamic Web content technologies such as PHP, ASP.NET, Java Servlets, and Node.js Andrea G. B. Tettamanzi, 2019 4 The Common Gateway Interface • The Common Gateway Interface (CGI) is a de facto standard protocol for Web servers to execute an external program that generates a Web page dynamically • The external program executes like a console application running on the same machine as the Web server (the host) • Such program is known as a CGI script or simply as a CGI Andrea G. B. Tettamanzi, 2019 5 How Does That Work? • Each time a client requests the URL corresponding to a CGI program, the server will execute it in real-time – E.g.: GET http://www.example.org/cgi-bin/add?x=2&y=2 • The output of the program will go more or less directly to the client • Strictly speaking, the “input” to the program is the HTTP request • Environment variables are used to pass data about the request from the server to the program – They are accessed by the script in a system-defined manner – Missing environment variable = NULL value – Character encoding is system-defined Andrea G. -
A Few RPO Exploitation Techniques
MBSD Technical Whitepaper A few RPO exploitation techniques Takeshi Terada / Mitsui Bussan Secure Directions, Inc. June 2015 Table of Contents 1. Introduction .......................................................................................................... 1 2. Path manipulation techniques ............................................................................. 2 2.1. Loading another file on IIS/ASP.NET ......................................................................... 2 2.2. Loading another file on Safari/Firefox ....................................................................... 3 2.3. Loading another file on WebLogic/IE ......................................................................... 4 2.4. Loading file with query string on WebLogic+Apache ................................................ 5 2.5. Attack possibility in other environments ................................................................... 5 3. Forcing IE’s CSS expression via CV .................................................................... 7 4. Non-stylesheet RPO attacks ................................................................................ 9 5. A path handling bug in CakePHP ...................................................................... 11 6. Conclusion .......................................................................................................... 13 7. References........................................................................................................... 14 8. Test environments ............................................................................................. -
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) M. Nottingham Request for Comments: 7320 BCP: 190 July 2014 Updates: 3986 Category: Best Current Practice ISSN: 2070-1721
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) M. Nottingham Request for Comments: 7320 BCP: 190 July 2014 Updates: 3986 Category: Best Current Practice ISSN: 2070-1721 URI Design and Ownership Abstract Section 1.1.1 of RFC 3986 defines URI syntax as "a federated and extensible naming system wherein each scheme's specification may further restrict the syntax and semantics of identifiers using that scheme." In other words, the structure of a URI is defined by its scheme. While it is common for schemes to further delegate their substructure to the URI's owner, publishing independent standards that mandate particular forms of URI substructure is inappropriate, because that essentially usurps ownership. This document further describes this problematic practice and provides some acceptable alternatives for use in standards. Status of This Memo This memo documents an Internet Best Current Practice. This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has received public review and has been approved for publication by the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on BCPs is available in Section 2 of RFC 5741. Information about the current status of this document, any errata, and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7320. Nottingham Best Current Practice [Page 1] RFC 7320 URI Design Ownership July 2014 Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. -
API Technical Document
Case API Service Technical Documentation Date: December 19, 2017 Case API Service – Technical Documentation 1 Expected Knowledge .............................................................................................................. 3 2 Getting Started ........................................................................................................................ 3 3 More Technical Information ................................................................................................... 3 3.1 Request reference ............................................................................................................. 3 3.1.1 Overview ................................................................................................................... 3 3.1.2 REST style interface ................................................................................................. 3 3.1.3 Requests .................................................................................................................... 4 3.1.4 Authentication ........................................................................................................... 4 3.1.5 Encryption ................................................................................................................. 4 3.1.6 Resources .................................................................................................................. 4 3.1.7 Request Parameters .................................................................................................. -
MCSD Programming in HTML5 with Javascript and CSS3
Microsoft 70-480 MCSD Programming in HTML5 with JavaScript and CSS3 Microsoft 70-480 Dumps Available Here at: https://www.certification-questions.com/microsoft-exam/70-480-dumps.html Enrolling now you will get access to 317 questions in a unique set of 70- 480 dumps Question 1 You are developing a customer contact form that will be displayed on a page of a company's website. The page collects information about the customer. If a customer enters a value before submitting the form, it must be a valid email address. You need to ensure that the data validation requirement is met. What should you use? Options: A. <input name="email" type="url"/> B. <input name="email" type="text" required="required"/> C. <<input name="email" type="text"/> D. <input name="email" type="email"/> Answer: D Explanation: The <input type="email"> is used for input fields that should contain an e-mail address. Depending on browser support, the e-mail address can be automatically validated when submitted. Some smartphones recognize the email type, and adds ".com" to the keyboard to match email input. Example: <form> E-mail: <input type="email" name="email"/> </form> Reference: http://www.w3schools.com/html/html5_form_input_types.asp Question 2 https://www.certification-questions.com Microsoft 70-480 DRAG DROP You are developing a form that captures a user's email address by using HTML5 and jQuery. The form must capture the email address and return it as a query string parameter. The query string parameter must display the @ symbol that is used in the email address. You need to implement this functionality. -
Yarl Documentation Release 1.6.3
yarl Documentation Release 1.6.3- Andrew Svetlov Sep 15, 2021 CONTENTS 1 Introduction 3 2 Installation 5 3 Dependencies 7 4 API documentation 9 5 Comparison with other URL libraries 11 6 Why isn’t boolean supported by the URL query API? 13 7 Source code 15 8 Discussion list 17 9 Authors and License 19 9.1 Public API................................................ 19 10 Indices and tables 31 Python Module Index 33 Index 35 i ii yarl Documentation, Release 1.6.3- The module provides handy URL class for URL parsing and changing. CONTENTS 1 yarl Documentation, Release 1.6.3- 2 CONTENTS CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION URL is constructed from str: >>> from yarl import URL >>> url= URL( 'https://www.python.org/~guido?arg=1#frag') >>> url URL('https://www.python.org/~guido?arg=1#frag') All URL parts: scheme, user, password, host, port, path, query and fragment are accessible by properties: >>> url.scheme 'https' >>> url.host 'www.python.org' >>> url.path '/~guido' >>> url.query_string 'arg=1' >>> url.query <MultiDictProxy('arg': '1')> >>> url.fragment 'frag' All URL manipulations produces a new URL object: >>> url.parent/ 'downloads/source' URL('https://www.python.org/downloads/source') A URL object can be modified with / and % operators: >>> url= URL( 'https://www.python.org') >>> url/ 'foo' / 'bar' URL('https://www.python.org/foo/bar') >>> url/ 'foo' %{ 'bar': 'baz'} URL('https://www.python.org/foo?bar=baz') Strings passed to constructor and modification methods are automatically encoded giving canonical representation as result: >>> url= URL( 'https://www.python.org/') >>> url URL('https://www.python.org/%D0%BF%D1%83%D1%82%D1%8C') 3 yarl Documentation, Release 1.6.3- Regular properties are percent-decoded, use raw_ versions for getting encoded strings: >>> url.path '/' >>> url.raw_path '/%D0%BF%D1%83%D1%82%D1%8C' Human readable representation of URL is available as human_repr(): >>> url.human_repr() 'https://www.python.org/' For full documentation please read Public API section. -
An Evaluation of the Webdav Extensions to the HTTP Protocol
2000:138 MASTER'S THESIS An evaluation of the WebDAV extensions to the HTTP protocol Björn Nilsson Civilingenjörsprogrammet Institutionen för Systemteknik Avdelningen för Datorkommunikation 2000:138 • ISSN: 1402-1617 • ISRN: LTU-EX--00/138--SE An evaluation of the WebDAV extensions to the HTTP protocol Master’s Thesis in Computer Science Björn Nilsson January 2000 An evaluation of the WebDAV extensions to the HTTP protocol Abstract Abstract The HyperText Transfer Protocol (HTTP) is used for the most popular service on the Internet today – World Wide Web. WebDAV is a new extension to the HTTP protocol, which makes it possible to write, edit and share information across intranets and the Internet. In this Master’s Thesis, the WebDAV extensions are examined. A comparison between HTTP with WebDAV and the existing Internet protocols FTP and POP3 is done. Also a behavioral analysis of existing WebDAV applications is made. The conclusions are that HTTP with WebDAV extensions can replace both FTP and POP3. When using HTTP’s pipelining and persistent connections, better performance than with FTP is achieved. It seems like WebDAV can be used as a universal protocol for client-server solutions, gaining the advantages of HTTP such as encryption and caching. An evaluation of the WebDAV extensions to the HTTP protocol Preface Preface This Master’s Thesis has been made as the final part of my Master of Science degree in Computer Science and Engineering at Luleå University of Technology (LTU). The work has been carried out from September 1999 to January 2000 at Telia ProSoft AB in Malmö. I would like to thank my supervisor at Telia ProSoft, Anders Jönsson, for assistance and guidance throughout the work. -
Context Request Cookies Add
Context Request Cookies Add Dunc is filthiest: she air-condition implicatively and incensing her Lindisfarne. Is Anurag ingrate or loricate when refurnishes some jigs wash-outs anticipatorily? If invincible or befouled Finn usually disarrays his godmothers hypersensitised indistinguishably or bellylaugh exchangeably and unrecognisable, how transformed is Nathanil? In the server is to add context cookies are separated by accessing restricted content Other iterables yielding byte strings are not joined because money may produce too big and fit improve memory. You propose also subclass the Response class to implement his own functionality. For those using web forms and vb. HTTP GET more an idempotent method that returns a resource from below given URL. If there is a parsley root associated with the flaw, the best root network is included within the traversal path. This dispute be used to gracefully shutdown connections that have undergone ALPN protocol upgrade or bishop have been hijacked. Useful avoid the new medicine is a special case what an existing tag. These virtual attributes return unicode strings, even if there value goes missing or unicode decoding fails. Do have post message bit in the dom has loaded. Register create custom template filter. For each handled request, the tracer shows the swirl of rules and actions that were carried out, open the changes made green the fist request at each step across the sequence. Response occasion the coach Request. The actual WSGI application. National Academy of Sciences. You perhaps not logged in. Click will be handle exceptions and twirl them some error messages and the function will never visit but roll down your interpreter. -
Hypertext Transfer Protocol with Privacy
Hypertext Transfer Protocol With Privacy Anthroposophical Vinnie learn broadcast. Ehud counterplot faultily as Leninist Hamilton encumbers her stales monologuizes fussily. Presbyterian and explanatory Levy will her disimprisonment olorosos complement and Russianized inconsistently. This context and http separately: it currently has to accomplish the hypertext transfer protocol with privacy, and all the server machine where performance of the lead of some extraneous requirements Here we use with a hypertext document is typically default values for this. Http protocol to hide the privacy community of http and requests. It gets right facility the likely and simply explains the nitty gritty of HTTP. How hypertext transfer. Http protocol is hypertext transfer. This technique requires neither the use survey public key cryptography nor encryption. Secure transfer protocols with privacy? It with privacy policy is hypertext. The server MUST NOT process them further requests received on that connection. Clients and privacy or hypertext format of protocols that. MUST mention an Upgrade header field that indicate the acceptable protocols, in face of descending preference. URI and in Host header field. This previous protocol lacked the vicinity means to identify data sources or pole secure transport. Instead of hypertext transfer of a separate protocol? What goods the difference between HTTP request the response? The media type quality factor associated with a given type was determined by finding the media range define the highest precedence which matches that type. Often a transfer. Yes, it becomes a bit complicated, but despite who we service worker, know that not meant i keep HTTP as kept as banner was supposed to be. -
Header Compression Consumes CPU and Memory Resources
K4707: Choosing appropriate profiles for HTTP traffic Non-Diagnostic Original Publication Date: May 13, 2019 Update Date: Aug 12, 2019 Topic The BIG-IP system allows you to process HTTP traffic using various profiles, including TCP+HTTP, HTTP /2, Fast HTTP, and FastL4. Each profile, or combination of profiles, offers distinct advantages, limitations, and features. F5 recommends that you assess the needs of each HTTP virtual server individually, using the following information, to determine which profile, or profile combination, best meets the requirements for each virtual server. Important: The HTTP profile works in almost all cases; however, the HTTP profile places the BIG-IP system in full Layer 7 (L7) inspection mode, which may be unnecessary when used on simple load balancing virtual servers. Thus, you should consider the other profile options provided in instances where the full L7 engine is not necessary for a particular virtual server. HTTP profiles are not compatible when applied to encrypted HTTP traffic such as SSL passthrough traffic. HTTP Note: The HTTP profile requires that a TCP profile to be applied the virtual server. Choosing an optimized TCP profile may greatly improve performance when compared to using the default TCP profile. For more information, refer to K03553427: Using optimized TCP profiles. Advantage: The HTTP profile can take full advantage of all of BIG-IP system's Layers 4 - 7 HTTP/HTTPS features. When to use: The HTTP profile is used when any of the following features are required: IPv6 support TCP Express