You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
There have been several discussions over the years about how WSGI frameworks apply routing in the case of URL-encoded path components. Here's a comment that links to a few of the discussions:
The issue is that when using routing features, the URL /user/foo/edit appears to be indistinguishable from /user/foo%2Fedit, and in case of routing rules for /user/{username} and /user/{username}/edit, the URL /user/foo%2Fedit will match the second rule and not the first.
URIs that differ in the replacement of a reserved character with its corresponding percent-encoded octet are not equivalent.
But the routing mechanism in popular WSGI frameworks such as Flask and FastAPI are unable to differentiate the mentioned URLs, because the URI's percent-encoding is decoded before the routing happens.
I believe PEP-3333 needs to clarify the correct behaviour.
Activity
[-]PEP-3333, URL-decoding and routing[/-][+]PEP 3333: URL-decoding and routing[/+]mahamad1234 commentedon Sep 30, 2023
Karliz24 commentedon Jan 29, 2024
amak commentedon Jan 29, 2024
This issue was discussed in detail in 2008
[Web-SIG] WSGI Amendments thoughts: the horror of charsets
https://www.mail-archive.com/web-sig@python.org/msg02483.html
It's a complex situation, I think that there is no straightforward answer.
I think it likely that the only way that the WSGI spec will change in relation to this issue is if there is a specific change proposed.