I am pretty out of things these days, but will a DOM UI file://
listing work for test_shell?

On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 8:29 PM, Darin Fisher <[email protected]> wrote:
> Right, that's the tricky part.  You'd need to do something creative.
> -Darin
>
> On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 7:59 AM, Pierre-Antoine LaFayette
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Okay. Yes we could use data URI, but where do we retrieve the icon
>> resources from at that level?
>>
>> 2010/1/6 Darin Fisher <[email protected]>
>>>
>>> We can also use data: URLs to inject the icons into the HTML file used to
>>> render the directory listings.  We can do that at the time when the HTML
>>> file is generated.
>>> -Darin
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 4:16 PM, Evan Martin <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I talked with Arv in person and I think I sufficiently convinced him
>>>> that getting DOMUI security right is tricky.  (Consider: XSSes in the
>>>> FTP display code, and that ftp sites containing HTML pages must not
>>>> have privs when displaying the HTML.)  That may still mean that DOMUI
>>>> is ok, but I would prefer to consider any other option available.
>>>>
>>>> One idea is to say "we don't care if any old page can <img
>>>> src='chrome://os-style-icon/foobar.psd'>" to get a Photoshop icon.
>>>> Not sure.
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 3:33 PM, Erik Arvidsson <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> > I think it should be OK to move these to DOMUI. NTP can also link to
>>>> > local HTML files and we already mark the chrome protocol in such a way
>>>> > that it cannot be accessed by any other scheme.
>>>> >
>>>> > erik
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 15:19, Pierre-Antoine LaFayette
>>>> > <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> >> That's why I wanted to check before starting any work. So the
>>>> >> question is
>>>> >> now whether it we'd rather use a DOM UI page or create a similar API
>>>> >> that
>>>> >> would be used solely by file:// and ftp://. What is needed for
>>>> >> http://crbug.com/24421 is simply access to the favicon data for file
>>>> >> types.
>>>> >> I'm not sure if these are available through WebCore or not. The drag
>>>> >> and
>>>> >> drop functionality required by http://crbug.com/27772 seems like it
>>>> >> would be
>>>> >> a lot of work without using a DOM UI page.
>>>> >> Any opinions on this part of my original post?:
>>>> >> Is there any reason why ChromiumOS' chrome://filebrowse DOM ui page
>>>> >> couldn't
>>>> >> be generalized to
>>>> >> be used for these other directory listing pages?
>>>> >> It just seems to me that it would be rather redundant handle 3
>>>> >> separate
>>>> >> instances of a file browse HTML page (ftp://, file:// and
>>>> >> chrome://filebrowse) in 3 separate ways.
>>>> >> Thanks.
>>>> >> 2010/1/5 Evan Martin <[email protected]>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 2:44 PM, Glen Murphy <[email protected]>
>>>> >>> wrote:
>>>> >>> > I don't think anyone has any objection to DOMUIifying those pages,
>>>> >>> > and
>>>> >>> > I don't think it would be a large amount of work. The only reason
>>>> >>> > they're not is that there hasn't been a reason to do so.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> DOM UI (at least when I last looked) just means that that renderer
>>>> >>> ("the page") gets extra privileges necessary for doing special
>>>> >>> browser
>>>> >>> calls, such as access to your browsing history for the History
>>>> >>> implementation.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> We went to some effort to keep these sorts of pages distinct from
>>>> >>> network content with the hope of reducing the security surface.  I
>>>> >>> worry changing this for FTP would be going in the wrong direction.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> It might make more sense to do something *like* DOM UI but with a
>>>> >>> different API just to keep things distinct.  But then we reencounter
>>>> >>> the same sorts of problems we have with DOM UI, like for example if
>>>> >>> you click a link from an FTP site to an HTML file, how to prevent
>>>> >>> the
>>>> >>> FTP privileges from bleeding into the HTML file.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> I feel like Darin is the person who would best know how to address
>>>> >>> this.
>>>> >>>  :)
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> --
>>>> >> Pierre.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> --
>>>> >> Chromium Developers mailing list: [email protected]
>>>> >> View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe:
>>>> >>    http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev
>>>> >>
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Chromium Developers mailing list: [email protected]
>>>> View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe:
>>>>    http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Pierre.
>
>
> --
> Chromium Developers mailing list: [email protected]
> View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe:
>    http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev
>
-- 
Chromium Developers mailing list: [email protected] 
View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: 
    http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev

Reply via email to