Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

8
  • 13
    .. Interesting. Thanks for explaining the caching behind this. Two questions... 1. Doesn't this mean there are security issues with using GET 2. Does this mean I could use POST to do the same thing as GET? Commented Aug 13, 2010 at 13:50
  • 100
    @Hristo: You could make an update on the server by using GET as well yes. And vice-a-versa. You could use POST to just fetch some data. Using my analogy with a car again: Even though your car has reverse gear, you wouldn't drive to work in reverse. Even though you could of course. Commented Aug 13, 2010 at 13:54
  • 24
    @Hristo: There are no issues with GET itself -- every site's home page is gotten by a GET, as are just about all links, so any security issues with it could break the whole web. The problem happens when web developers don't know a GET should be idempotent, and use it for things like "delete" or "add to cart" links/buttons. Commented Aug 13, 2010 at 13:58
  • 3
    @barlop - "The data is included in the body of the request." Commented Oct 24, 2015 at 23:14
  • 3
    Another way to alleviate IE caching GET calls would be to set headers for incoming GET requests on the server side. These headers would prevent caching on the client side. Commented Jan 17, 2018 at 14:26