[#8136] Confused exception handling in Continuation Context — "Robert Dober" <robert.dober@...>

Hi all

13 messages 2006/07/06

[#8248] One-Click Installer: MinGW? or VC2005? — "Curt Hibbs" <ml.chibbs@...>

I just posted this to ruby-talk. But I would also like to discuss this

33 messages 2006/07/18
[#8264] Re: One-Click Installer: MinGW? or VC2005? — Charlie Savage <cfis@...> 2006/07/19

From my experience using both tool chains on Windows (for the ruby-prof

[#8266] Re: One-Click Installer: MinGW? or VC2005? — "Curt Hibbs" <ml.chibbs@...> 2006/07/19

Tim, I'm going to top reply since your post was so long. I'm interested in

[#8267] Re: One-Click Installer: MinGW? or VC2005? — Charlie Savage <cfis@...> 2006/07/19

> Tim, I'm going to top reply since your post was so long. I'm interested in

[#8271] my sandboxing extension!! — why the lucky stiff <ruby-core@...>

I have (what feels like) very exciting news. I finally sat down to code up my

17 messages 2006/07/19

[#8430] Re: doc patch: weakref. — "Berger, Daniel" <Daniel.Berger@...>

> -----Original Message-----

19 messages 2006/07/28
[#8434] Re: doc patch: weakref. — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2006/07/29

Hi,

[#8436] Re: doc patch: weakref. — Daniel Berger <djberg96@...> 2006/07/29

Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#8437] Re: doc patch: weakref. — Mauricio Fernandez <mfp@...> 2006/07/29

On Sat, Jul 29, 2006 at 07:37:24PM +0900, Daniel Berger wrote:

[#8441] Inconsistency in scoping during module_eval? — "Charles O Nutter" <headius@...>

I have the following code:

18 messages 2006/07/30
[#8442] Re: Inconsistency in scoping during module_eval? — nobu@... 2006/07/30

Hi,

[#8443] Re: Inconsistency in scoping during module_eval? — "Charles O Nutter" <headius@...> 2006/07/30

Why does this:

[#8445] Re: Inconsistency in scoping during module_eval? — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2006/07/30

Hi,

[#8454] Re: Inconsistency in scoping during module_eval? — "Charles O Nutter" <headius@...> 2006/07/31

So to clarify...

Interest in NTLM/Negotiate patch for net/http?

From: "Justin Bailey" <jgbailey@...>
Date: 2006-07-20 00:01:08 UTC
List: ruby-core #8299
My workplace recently installed Microsoft's ISA server, which proxies all
internet traffic. Normally, this is no problem, but it is set up to only
accept NTLM/Negotiate authentication. net/http (and thus open-uri) are only
set up for Basic authentication. Having a bunch of utility scripts that
scrape the internet for me, I decided to fix the problem. All of the
solutions I found reverese engineered the NTLM protocol and, given a
username and password, could authenticate with the server. However, *none*
of them would authenticate as the current user. I am loath to put my
username and especially password into configuration files, so I decided to
create my own solution.

Two weeks later, I've learned more about Win32 API integration than I ever
wanted to know, but I did manage to create a module which serves my
purposes. I published this module as the rubysspi gem on rubyforge  and
included a redefinition of Net::HTTP#request which can use my
NTLM/Negotatiate authentication solution.

I'm wondering if there is interest from the core team on a patch which
includes this capability in the ruby distribution. Personally, though it may
not be useful to a large number of people, it will really make anyone in the
future who has to deal with this problem much happier.

Thanks in advance for any thoughts or feedback?

Justin

In This Thread

Prev Next