Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.
Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
In a Microsoft Security Document, in the Code Review section ( http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa302437.aspx ), it suggests setting the globalization.requestEncoding and globalization.responseEncoding to “ISO-8859-1” opposed to “UTF-8” or another Unicode format.
What are the downsides to using “ISO-8859-1”, in the past I’ve set both to UTF-8 for maximum compatibility.
The downside is that it’s not as compatible. In fact, there are lots of reasons not to use anything but UTF-8.
I looked at that doc page and I’m not sure it’s actually suggesting to use Latin1 – I think it might just be using that as an example.
The HttpUtility encoding methods all use UTF-8 by default, so unless you really didn’t want international characters coming in with your inputs, I don’t see any reason to set it to Latin-1.