<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"><channel><title>Sessions on IT Comparison</title><link>https://comparison.metacog.co.kr/tags/sessions/</link><description>Recent content in Sessions on IT Comparison</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-us</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 03 Aug 2026 04:24:11 +0900</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://comparison.metacog.co.kr/tags/sessions/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>JWT vs Session-Based Authentication: Stateless Tokens or Server-Tracked State</title><link>https://comparison.metacog.co.kr/posts/2026-08-03-jwt-vs-session-based-authentication-stateless-tokens-or-serv/</link><pubDate>Mon, 03 Aug 2026 04:24:11 +0900</pubDate><guid>https://comparison.metacog.co.kr/posts/2026-08-03-jwt-vs-session-based-authentication-stateless-tokens-or-serv/</guid><description>&lt;h2 id="overview"&gt;Overview&lt;/h2&gt;
&lt;p&gt;JWT and session-based authentication both prove who a user is on every request, but they disagree about where that proof lives. A &lt;strong class="kw"&gt;JWT&lt;/strong&gt; is a signed, self-contained token the client carries and the server checks locally, while &lt;strong class="kw"&gt;session-based&lt;/strong&gt; auth hands out a small ID that maps to state the server stores and looks up on every call. That single difference in where state lives cascades into how each approach scales, revokes access, and fits different architectures.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>