Closed Bug 299123 Opened 20 years ago Closed 20 years ago

Sun Java VM 1.5.0P2 prompts for proxy auth even though browser already has details

Categories

(Firefox :: General, defect)

x86
Windows XP
defect
Not set
normal

Tracking

()

RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 135840

People

(Reporter: spam, Unassigned)

References

()

Details

User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.8) Gecko/20050511 Firefox/1.0.4 Build Identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.8) Gecko/20050511 Firefox/1.0.4 The company I work for uses HTTP 1.1 authentication to allow access to the web. You type in a username and password, and away you go. When a Java applet opened on a page within Firefox needs access to data out on the internet, I receive a seperate proxy authentication prompt from Java, even though I've already given the browser my details. This does not occur in Internet Explorer - the browser must pass the proxy auth details to Java. Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: N.B. This bug only relates to proxy auth via HTTP 1.1 basic. No other method has been tried, but in theory this affects other auth methods too. 1. Make sure Firefox isn't running. 2. Start a fresh instance of Firefox. 3. Type in the address of a web site. The browser prompts for proxy auth details (username and password). 4. Type in username and password and press <enter>. 5. Find another page with a Java applet on it. The Java applet must itself require data from off the web. (Example: http://camvista.com/scotland/edinburgh/capcity.php3) Actual Results: Java prompts for proxy auth. Expected Results: Java should not be prompting seperately for proxy auth, rather the browser should pass the required details to it just like Internet Explorer. Not sure if this is a "bug" so much as a limitation of the plugin architecture. Does the Netscape plugin API allow proxy authentication details to be passed to plugins?
That is something you should tell Sun about.
dupe of bug 135840 via bug 136856 and bug 142526 *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 135840 ***
Status: UNCONFIRMED → RESOLVED
Closed: 20 years ago
Resolution: --- → DUPLICATE
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.