From: Rich Graves <llurch@networking.stanford.edu>
Date: Mon, 19 May 1997 08:26:31 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: referers and W3 (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <337F9366.167E@netscape.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GUL.3.95.970518170904.13290C-100000@Networking.Stanford.EDU>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Yes, I'm aware of that. I don't think it's a good idea. If you don't agree
with the standard, work within the W3C to change it. Especially if it's an
undocumented cypherpunk-only feature, that bugs me.

-rich

On Sun, 18 May 1997, Tom Weinstein wrote:

> Rich Graves wrote:
> > 
> > A friend who webmasters a large site that is implementing
> > referer-specific content sent me this when I mentioned the
> > cpunks/cryptography thread of a few months back. I basically agree
> > with the W3C. While user education on the potential privacy threat is
> > essential, I do not believe that Netscape should violate published
> > technical standards. There are also privacy and property issues from
> > the server's perspective.
> 
> Just in case someone hasn't heard about this yet, we support a stealth
> preference in 4.0 to turn of referer headers.  If you wish to disable
> referer, you can place the following line in your prefs.js file:
> 
> pref("network.sendRefererHeader", false);
> 
> There is no UI checkbox for this preference because it was added after
> we froze the UI.
> 
> -- 
> You should only break rules of style if you can    | Tom Weinstein
> coherently explain what you gain by so doing.      | tomw@netscape.com