"Same website on IPv6 and IPv4" test should not be required

[peterjin-org]

Currently, internet.nl gives an error if the IPv6 and IPv4 versions of a website are different. However, this is not useful for an IPv6-only website whose "IPv4 version" just says something like "You need to enable IPv6 to view this website" and has no actual content (e.g. earthite.com). Instead, this subtest should only be made a warning, in order to still catch IPv6-related misconfigurations, but not to disqualify websites that may have a legitimate reason to have different content on IPv6 and IPv4.

[mxsasha]

Easy test site: ip.tyk.nu

@baknu as part of this, I have added the use of detail web ipv6 web-ipv46 verdict info and we no longer use detail web ipv6 web-ipv46 verdict bad. Text can probably mostly be copied, maybe tweaked. Explanation may also need to be updated. This needs to be done in the content repo.

[baknu]

So this means that the website test gets a bit more relaxed (or less strict) in general. Although I believe it affects just a few websites, I can see the point. I would suggest to give a "warning" and not an "informational" instead of the current "bad", because in most cases the difference will not be intended and should be fixed by the website owner. Note that both a "warning" and an "informational" do not impact the %-score. Might be something to discuss with the steering group.

[mxsasha]

Adjustments based on discussion:

    1. if HTTP (port 80) and/or HTTPS (port 443) over IPv4 are also available over IPv6;
    2. if HTTP headers (such as a redirect header) over IPv4 are also received over IPv6;
    3. if HTML content over IPv4 is the same over IPv6. After stripping eventual nonces we do a comparison of the recieved content. The content difference must not be higher than 10% to pass this subtest. The treshold makes sure that small differences (for example due to changing ads) don not lead to a fail of this subtest as well.

1 and 2 should be FAIL (❌), 3 should be NOTICE (⚠️)

[mxsasha]

The new behaviour is now implemented in #1039. We need to make content for the new label detail web ipv6 web-ipv46 verdict notice which is used for scenario 3 from the above list.

[baknu]

@mxsasha Have you added this text label somehwere in the content repo? Or shall I add it to the content branch "version-1.8" under detail/web/ipv6/web-ipv46/verdict?

[mxsasha]

@mxsasha Have you added this text label somehwere in the content repo? Or shall I add it to the content branch "version-1.8" under detail/web/ipv6/web-ipv46/verdict?

I did not create it in branch yet, so yes, please create it.

[baknu]

@mxsasha Ok, done. Also edited the test explanation and the "bad" verdicts. Could you review? Thanks.

[mxsasha]

@mxsasha Ok, done. Also edited the test explanation and the "bad" verdicts. Could you review? Thanks.

Looks good!