Is it illegal for the WebKit glue layer to send synchronous messages to the
browser requesting the icon data URI?

2010/1/7 Darin Fisher <[email protected]>

> It could... but, I though the conclusion was to avoid DOM UI for file://
> and ftp:// directory listings (for other reasons).  In that case, we
> should be able to continue using the same UI.  I think there is just the
> open question of how to provide icon resources to the page.
>
> -Darin
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 4:11 AM, Dean McNamee <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Yeah, so my question was, does that mean test_shell would have a
>> separate mechanism (the current one?) for file:/// listings?
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 8:47 AM, Darin Fisher <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > DOM UI implies chrome://, which is implemented by the
>> ChromeURLDataManager
>> > (in browser/dom_ui/).  TestShell wouldn't be able to use that.
>> > -Darin
>> >
>> > On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 1:43 PM, Dean McNamee <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> 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
>> >> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>


-- 
Pierre.
-- 
Chromium Developers mailing list: [email protected] 
View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: 
    http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev

Reply via email to