3 ms·
Because access to that resource can be replicated by simply viewing network traffic logs. Sending authorization info in the headers over SSL would be much more
by jessegreathouse 10y ago
Because access to that resource can be replicated by simply viewing network traffic logs. Sending authorization info in the headers over SSL would be much more safe.
- morgante 10y agoFirst of all, any secure resource should only be accesses over SSL so I assume that. The path is exactly as secure as authorization headers. Network logs will not show the path of SSL requests (it's encrypted).
- zaroth 10y agoURL based Bitcoin wallets proved this not to be the case. URLs get picked up by Omnibar, Skype, etc. they find their way into search results... I wouldn't even trust secret material in the fragment-id even though that in theory is safer.
- ikeboy 10y agoDoesn't excluding them in robots.txt solve the search engine problem?
- _Understated_ 10y agoFollowing the rules laid out in a robots.txt file is optional. The reputable search engines tend to play by the rules but dodgy ones? Not so sure.
- ikeboy 10y agoThe dodgy ones don't have access to the URLs. The example was Skype links: if Microsoft scrapes those, they'll follow the rules and not make them available in searches. If you give your link to a dodgy search engine, you've lost.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]