HTTP/1.1: Status Code Definitions. Each Status-Code is described below, including a description of which method(s) it can follow and any metainformation required in the response. 10.1 Informational 1xx This class of status code indicates a provisional response, consisting only of the Status-Line and optional headers, and is terminated by an empty line.
There are no required headers for this class of status code. Since HTTP/1.0 did not define any 1xx status codes, servers MUST NOT send a 1xx response to an HTTP/1.0 client except under experimental conditions. A client MUST be prepared to accept one or more 1xx status responses prior to a regular response, even if the client does not expect a 100 (Continue) status message. Proxies MUST forward 1xx responses, unless the connection between the proxy and its client has been closed, or unless the proxy itself requested the generation of the 1xx response. 10.1.1 100 Continue The client SHOULD continue with its request. 10.1.2 101 Switching Protocols 10.2 Successful 2xx - Date.
Web Security: Are You Part Of The Problem? - Smashing Magazine. Advertisement Website security is an interesting topic and should be high on the radar of anyone who has a Web presence under their control.
Ineffective Web security leads to all of the things that make us hate the Web: spam, viruses, identity theft, to name a few. The problem with Web security is that, as important as it is, it is also very complex. I am quite sure that some of you reading this are already part of an network of attack computers and that your servers are sending out spam messages without you even knowing it. Your emails and passwords have been harvested and resold to people who think you need either a new watch, a male enhancement product or a cheap mortgage. The reason is that security experts don’t like to talk too much in public about what they do and where the issues lie; and sadly enough, they can also come across as arrogant in their views. An Interesting Report On Web Security 2PDF: Web Vulnerabilities Q1/Q2 20093. URIs: The Main Way To Attack A Web Service Phishing. JavaFX. Univeral Resource Identifiers.
Up to Design Issues Universal Resource Identifiers -- Axioms of Web Architecture The operation of the World Wide Web, and its interoperability between platforms of differing hardware and software manufacturers, depend on the specifications of protocols such as HTTP, data formats such as HTML, and other syntaxes such as the URL or, more generally, URI specifications.
Behind these specifications lie some important rules of behavior which determine the foundation of the properties of the Web. These are rules and principles upon which new designs of programs and the behavior of people must rely. And it is that reliance which makes the Web both an information space which works now, and the foundation for future applications, protocols, and extensions. Universal Resource Identifiers The Web is a universal information space. An information object is "on the web" if it has a URI. The Semantic Web allows an information objects to give information about anything - real objects, abstract concepts. What do HTTP URIs Identify? - Design Issues.
Up to Design Issues Note: (2006).
This architectural question has now been decided by the W3C TAG, in a compromise which I think works quite well, and is described in a later short note and a TAG finding. Background Note This question has been addressed only vaguely in the specifications. However, the lack of very concise logical definition of such things had not been a problem, until the formal systems started to use them. The efforts of the Technical Architecture Group to create an architecture document with common terms highlighted this problem.
This document explains why the author find it difficult to work in the alternative proposed philosophies. 1. The WWW is a space of information objects. Carry some sort of message, and Can be represented, to a greater or lesser authenticity, in bits. GoodURIs - ESW Wiki. What qualities make a URI work well in RDF and on the web in general?
Unambiguous. Is there a consensus of meaning, where everyone using the URI as a name uses it to refer to essentially the same thing? Or is there confusion and disagreement among reasonable people? If you use an ambiguous URI in some RDF content, that content becomes (additionally) ambiguous, which is rarely what you want. (this seems like nonsense to me. Are file: URIs (with the hostname omitted, as it usually is) unambiguous?
One can imagine " as denoting some platonic thing with multiple realizations around the world, but this is pretty sketchy. (I think the problem centers around the attempt to talk about the identity of the 'thing' named as somehow independent of the name used. It's possible to have subsets of the meaning available in certain situations but not others, as in ConcentricSemantics. I take issue with the idea that good URI are, or should be, if used properly, unambiguous. Navigable (or Browsable).