Summary: | Web Inspector: take into account the whole security origin instead of just host | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Product: | WebKit | Reporter: | Alexei Filippov <alph> | ||||||||
Component: | Web Inspector (Deprecated) | Assignee: | Alexei Filippov <alph> | ||||||||
Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||||||||||
Severity: | Normal | CC: | apavlov, bweinstein, dglazkov, joepeck, keishi, loislo, michaeln, pfeldman, pmuellr, rik, timothy, webkit.review.bot, yurys | ||||||||
Priority: | P2 | ||||||||||
Version: | 528+ (Nightly build) | ||||||||||
Hardware: | All | ||||||||||
OS: | All | ||||||||||
Bug Depends on: | |||||||||||
Bug Blocks: | 91617 | ||||||||||
Attachments: |
|
Description
Alexei Filippov
2012-07-31 04:25:23 PDT
Created attachment 155488 [details]
Patch
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 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
Created attachment 155503 [details]
Patch
Comment on attachment 155503 [details] Patch Clearing flags on attachment: 155503 Committed r124201: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/124201> All reviewed patches have been landed. Closing bug. 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. (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. (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. |