Bug 92740 – Web Inspector: take into account the whole security origin instead of just host

• Component: Web Inspector (Deprecated)
• Status: RESOLVED FIXED

[Alexei Filippov]

Make the DOM Storage Agent take into account all the
information relevant to the security origin, i.e. protocol, host, and
port. Currently only the host is taken into account. That causes
inspector to show the first storage only in the case a page operates
over several security origins sharing the same host (but having
different protocols e.g. http and https).

[Alexei Filippov]

Created attachment 155488 [details]
Patch

[WebKit Review Bot]

Comment on attachment 155488 [details]
Patch

Attachment 155488 [details] did not pass chromium-ews (chromium-xvfb):
Output: http://queues.webkit.org/results/13392684

New failing tests:
http/tests/inspector-enabled/dom-storage-open.html

[WebKit Review Bot]

Created attachment 155498 [details]
Archive of layout-test-results from gce-cr-linux-06

The attached test failures were seen while running run-webkit-tests on the chromium-ews.
Bot: gce-cr-linux-06  Port: <class 'webkitpy.common.config.ports.ChromiumXVFBPort'>  Platform: Linux-2.6.39-gcg-201203291735-x86_64-with-Ubuntu-10.04-lucid

[Alexei Filippov]

Created attachment 155503 [details]
Patch

[WebKit Review Bot]

Comment on attachment 155503 [details]
Patch

Clearing flags on attachment: 155503

Committed r124201: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/124201>

[WebKit Review Bot]

All reviewed patches have been landed.  Closing bug.

[Timothy Hatcher]

This is a protocol change. So why not also change the label from "host" to "origin" given the fact that it is not just the host anymore?

Avoiding a protocol change would also be nice. Having "origin" as a separate field along side "host" could work, or add "port" and "scheme".

Does the origin even need reported to the front-end? The check for which items to show happens on the back-end, and the fornt-end isn't parsing the origin. Then you avoid changing the protocol and just report the host to the front-end.

[Pavel Feldman]

(In reply to comment #7)
> This is a protocol change. So why not also change the label from "host" to "origin" given the fact that it is not just the host anymore?
> 

This domain is hidden altogether, so this is not a breaking change as long as it is reflected properly in the .json file.

> Avoiding a protocol change would also be nice. Having "origin" as a separate field along side "host" could work, or add "port" and "scheme".
> 

We should not care about hidden domains much. Adding fields only increases maintenance cost and the traffic.

> Does the origin even need reported to the front-end? The check for which items to show happens on the back-end, and the fornt-end isn't parsing the origin. Then you avoid changing the protocol and just report the host to the front-end.

That is a good observation. We probably parse domain though - it shows up in the resources panel UI.

[Alexei Filippov]

(In reply to comment #7)
> This is a protocol change. So why not also change the label from "host" to "origin" given the fact that it is not just the host anymore?
> 
> Avoiding a protocol change would also be nice. Having "origin" as a separate field along side "host" could work, or add "port" and "scheme".

Changed the host to origin in the protocol. Please see https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=92979

> Does the origin even need reported to the front-end? The check for which items to show happens on the back-end, and the fornt-end isn't parsing the origin. Then you avoid changing the protocol and just report the host to the front-end.

I think we need to show the whole origin in the FE, so the used may distinguish e.g. http://host and https://host storages.