Hacker News Reader

Either you do it for everything, or you do it for only POST and you end up missing half of the vulnerabilities. Correct me if I'm wrong, but your CSRF attack used a GET request, did it not? [1]

Web applications make state-changing operations on GET requests. You might not like it, but they do.

[1] <img src="https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?logout style="display: none;" />

View on HN

>Web applications make state-changing operations on GET requests. You might not like it, but they do.

but when developer made a mistake with GET it is 100% his problem - it's out of question. he should be punished :D

Nonsensical. CSRF isn't God's punishment for REST-lessness.

You're both just choosing different places to draw the line between developer responsibility and browser responsibility.

That is like saying "you're both just suggesting two totally different designs for the HTTP security model".

His model is wrong. Again: I assume he wants to know that, so, bluntness.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com