245
SPAs were a mistake
(lemmy.world)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 12 Dec 2023
245 points (95.9% liked)
Programmer Humor
32050 readers
1556 users here now
Post funny things about programming here! (Or just rant about your favourite programming language.)
Rules:
- Posts must be relevant to programming, programmers, or computer science.
- No NSFW content.
- Jokes must be in good taste. No hate speech, bigotry, etc.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
...so allow...either?
What's so hard about checking two headers (
Authorization:andCookie:) for the authtoken?It's a security thing. The HttpOnly cookie can't be stolen using XSS or something like that, while a bearer token must be stored somewhere where javascript can see it.
That's assuming the client wants to make a web app. They may need to connect something else to that API.
It's perfectly normal to be able to cater to more authentication scenarios than "web app logging in directly to the target API and using its cookies".
If they want to make a web app they should use the cookie mechanism but ultimately each client app is responsible for how it secures its access.
Then again, cookie auth is vulnerable to CSRF. Pick your poison.
Although CSRF protection just adds a minor inconvenience, while there is never a guarantee your code is XSS vulnerability free.