Changeset 1960 for draft-ietf-httpbis

Timestamp:

31/10/12 07:33:04 (10 years ago)

Author:

julian.reschke@…

Message:

re-gen HTML for [1959]

File:

• draft-ietf-httpbis/latest/p6-cache.html (modified) (6 diffs)

draft-ietf-httpbis/latest/p6-cache.html

@@ -452 +452 @@
   } 
   @bottom-center {
-       content: "Expires April 25, 2013"; 
+       content: "Expires May 4, 2013"; 
   } 
   @bottom-right {
@@ -498 +498 @@
       <meta name="dct.creator" content="Reschke, J. F.">
       <meta name="dct.identifier" content="urn:ietf:id:draft-ietf-httpbis-p6-cache-latest">
-      <meta name="dct.issued" scheme="ISO8601" content="2012-10-22">
+      <meta name="dct.issued" scheme="ISO8601" content="2012-10-31">
       <meta name="dct.replaces" content="urn:ietf:rfc:2616">
       <meta name="dct.abstract" content="The Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) is an application-level protocol for distributed, collaborative, hypertext information systems. This document defines requirements on HTTP caches and the associated header fields that control cache behavior or indicate cacheable response messages.">
@@ -524 +524 @@
             </tr>
             <tr>
-               <td class="left">Expires: April 25, 2013</td>
+               <td class="left">Expires: May 4, 2013</td>
                <td class="right">J. Reschke, Editor</td>
             </tr>
@@ -533 +533 @@
             <tr>
                <td class="left"></td>
-               <td class="right">October 22, 2012</td>
+               <td class="right">October 31, 2012</td>
             </tr>
          </tbody>
@@ -559 +559 @@
          in progress”.
       </p>
-      <p>This Internet-Draft will expire on April 25, 2013.</p>
+      <p>This Internet-Draft will expire on May 4, 2013.</p>
       <h1><a id="rfc.copyrightnotice" href="#rfc.copyrightnotice">Copyright Notice</a></h1>
       <p>Copyright © 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved.</p>
@@ -1787 +1787 @@
          as sensitive information.
       </p>
-      <p id="rfc.section.10.p.2">Implementation flaws might allow attackers to insert content into a cache ("cache poisoning"), leading to compromise of clients
+      <p id="rfc.section.10.p.2">Furthermore, the very use of a cache can bring about privacy concerns. For example, if two users share a cache, and the first
+         one browses to a site, the second may be able to detect that the other has been to that site, because the resources from it
+         load more quickly, thanks to the cache.
+      </p>
+      <p id="rfc.section.10.p.3">Implementation flaws might allow attackers to insert content into a cache ("cache poisoning"), leading to compromise of clients
          that trust that content. Because of their nature, these attacks are difficult to mitigate.
       </p>
-      <p id="rfc.section.10.p.3">Likewise, implementation flaws (as well as misunderstanding of cache operation) might lead to caching of sensitive information
+      <p id="rfc.section.10.p.4">Likewise, implementation flaws (as well as misunderstanding of cache operation) might lead to caching of sensitive information
          (e.g., authentication credentials) that is thought to be private, exposing it to unauthorized parties.
       </p>
-      <p id="rfc.section.10.p.4">Note that the Set-Cookie response header <a href="#RFC6265" id="rfc.xref.RFC6265.1"><cite title="HTTP State Management Mechanism">[RFC6265]</cite></a> does not inhibit caching; a cacheable response with a Set-Cookie header can be (and often is) used to satisfy subsequent requests
+      <p id="rfc.section.10.p.5">Note that the Set-Cookie response header <a href="#RFC6265" id="rfc.xref.RFC6265.1"><cite title="HTTP State Management Mechanism">[RFC6265]</cite></a> does not inhibit caching; a cacheable response with a Set-Cookie header can be (and often is) used to satisfy subsequent requests
          to caches. Servers who wish to control caching of these responses are encouraged to emit appropriate Cache-Control response
          headers.