身份验证

J. Helfrich
{"title":"身份验证","authors":"J. Helfrich","doi":"10.1201/9780429506475-15","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\"HTTP/1.0\", includes the specification for a Basic Access Authentication scheme. This scheme is not considered to be a secure method of user authentication (unless used in conjunction with some external secure system such as SSL [5]), as the user name and password are passed over the network as cleartext. This document also provides the specification for HTTP's authentication framework, the original Basic authentication scheme and a scheme based on cryptographic hashes, referred to as \"Digest Access Authentication\". It is therefore also intended to serve as a replacement for RFC 2069 [6]. Some optional elements specified by RFC 2069 have been removed from this specification due to problems found since its publication; other new elements have been added for compatibility, those new elements have been made optional, but are strongly recommended. Like Basic, Digest access authentication verifies that both parties to a communication know a shared secret (a password); unlike Basic, this verification can be done without sending the password in the clear, which is RFC 2617 HTTP Authentication June 1999 Basic's biggest weakness. As with most other authentication protocols, the greatest sources of risks are usually found not in the core protocol itself but in policies and procedures surrounding its use. Franks, et al. Standards Track [Page 2] RFC 2617 HTTP Authentication June 1999","PeriodicalId":424308,"journal":{"name":"Security for Software Engineers","volume":"32 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Authentication\",\"authors\":\"J. Helfrich\",\"doi\":\"10.1201/9780429506475-15\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\\"HTTP/1.0\\\", includes the specification for a Basic Access Authentication scheme. This scheme is not considered to be a secure method of user authentication (unless used in conjunction with some external secure system such as SSL [5]), as the user name and password are passed over the network as cleartext. This document also provides the specification for HTTP's authentication framework, the original Basic authentication scheme and a scheme based on cryptographic hashes, referred to as \\\"Digest Access Authentication\\\". It is therefore also intended to serve as a replacement for RFC 2069 [6]. Some optional elements specified by RFC 2069 have been removed from this specification due to problems found since its publication; other new elements have been added for compatibility, those new elements have been made optional, but are strongly recommended. Like Basic, Digest access authentication verifies that both parties to a communication know a shared secret (a password); unlike Basic, this verification can be done without sending the password in the clear, which is RFC 2617 HTTP Authentication June 1999 Basic's biggest weakness. As with most other authentication protocols, the greatest sources of risks are usually found not in the core protocol itself but in policies and procedures surrounding its use. Franks, et al. Standards Track [Page 2] RFC 2617 HTTP Authentication June 1999\",\"PeriodicalId\":424308,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Security for Software Engineers\",\"volume\":\"32 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-11-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Security for Software Engineers\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429506475-15\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Security for Software Engineers","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429506475-15","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

“HTTP/1.0”,包括基本访问认证方案的规范。该方案不被认为是一种安全的用户身份验证方法(除非与一些外部安全系统(如SSL[5])结合使用),因为用户名和密码以明文形式在网络上传递。本文档还提供了HTTP认证框架的规范,原始的基本认证方案和基于加密哈希的方案,称为“摘要访问认证”。因此,它也打算作为RFC 2069[6]的替代品。由于自发布以来发现的问题,RFC 2069指定的一些可选元素已从本规范中删除;为了兼容性添加了其他新元素,这些新元素是可选的,但强烈推荐使用。与基本访问身份验证一样,摘要访问身份验证通信双方是否知道共享的秘密(密码);与Basic不同的是,这种验证可以在不发送密码的情况下完成,这是RFC 2617 HTTP Authentication 1999年6月Basic的最大弱点。与大多数其他身份验证协议一样,最大的风险来源通常不在于核心协议本身,而在于围绕其使用的策略和过程。弗兰克斯等人。标准跟踪[Page 2] RFC 2617 HTTP身份验证1999年6月
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Authentication
"HTTP/1.0", includes the specification for a Basic Access Authentication scheme. This scheme is not considered to be a secure method of user authentication (unless used in conjunction with some external secure system such as SSL [5]), as the user name and password are passed over the network as cleartext. This document also provides the specification for HTTP's authentication framework, the original Basic authentication scheme and a scheme based on cryptographic hashes, referred to as "Digest Access Authentication". It is therefore also intended to serve as a replacement for RFC 2069 [6]. Some optional elements specified by RFC 2069 have been removed from this specification due to problems found since its publication; other new elements have been added for compatibility, those new elements have been made optional, but are strongly recommended. Like Basic, Digest access authentication verifies that both parties to a communication know a shared secret (a password); unlike Basic, this verification can be done without sending the password in the clear, which is RFC 2617 HTTP Authentication June 1999 Basic's biggest weakness. As with most other authentication protocols, the greatest sources of risks are usually found not in the core protocol itself but in policies and procedures surrounding its use. Franks, et al. Standards Track [Page 2] RFC 2617 HTTP Authentication June 1999
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信