API should be exposed to offer to developers a path of providing a user with a choice of whether or not to load and display/run insecure content. Implementation will be based upon policy decisions.
I've come to realization that this bug doesn't really cover the needs of bug #71465. This bug oversees addition of API for policy decision requests about displaying or running insecure content, which is a part of methods used in FrameLoader class, while didDetectXSS originates from the HTML parser. I'll create a new meta bug with the goal of improving security-related API, remove this bug from blocking #71465 and set both of these to block the new bug.
Created attachment 114755 [details] Patch When landed, DumpRenderTree should also require an update, setting the new WebKitWebSettings properties to true. Not flagging for commit queue for now.
(In reply to comment #2) > Created an attachment (id=114755) [details] > Patch > > When landed, DumpRenderTree should also require an update, setting the new WebKitWebSettings properties to true. Not flagging for commit queue for now. Should I also add in this patch signals that would be emitted from FrameLoaderClient::didDisplayInsecureContent and FrameLoaderClient::didRunInsecureContent? The whole patch and API was developed along with adding this feature to epiphany. If there's interest, I can later put a patch up on GNOME bugzilla.
Given the focus is now shifting towards WebKit2 APIs and WebKit2 in general, meaning new API additions to WebKit1 don't really make sense, I'm willing to close this bug as a WONTFIX. I'll do so after I get some additional thumbs-ups in agreement.
Sure. I'd be happy to review this patch for WebKit2.
(In reply to comment #5) > Sure. I'd be happy to review this patch for WebKit2. I've added an API todo task: http://trac.webkit.org/wiki/WebKitGTK/WebKit2Roadmap?action=diff&version=35 Closing this as a WONTFIX.
Comment on attachment 114755 [details] Patch Cleared review? from attachment 114755 [details] so that this bug does not appear in http://webkit.org/pending-review. If you would like this patch reviewed, please attach it to a new bug (or re-open this bug before marking it for review again).