[JENKINS-71034] [JENKINS-71035] [JENKINS-71036] [JENKINS-71037] Improve CSP compatibility

[yaroslavafenkin]

• JENKINS-71034
• JENKINS-71035
• JENKINS-71036
• JENKINS-71037

Testing done

Tested manually whether the behaviour is the same before and after the fix. Did certain modifications in Java code to make it easier to reach corresponding Jelly templates.
Unsure if the UI part has any test coverage. I can try to write some unit tests for certain bits to make sure functionality isn't broken if you tell me it's needed.

Proposed changelog entries

• Improve CSP compatibility by un-inlining javascript code

Proposed upgrade guidelines

N/A

Submitter checklist

• The Jira issue, if it exists, is well-described.
• The changelog entries and upgrade guidelines are appropriate for the audience affected by the change (users or developers, depending on the change) and are in the imperative mood (see examples).
  • Fill in the Proposed upgrade guidelines section only if there are breaking changes or changes that may require extra steps from users during upgrade.
• There is automated testing or an explanation as to why this change has no tests.
• New public classes, fields, and methods are annotated with @Restricted or have @since TODO Javadocs, as appropriate.
• New deprecations are annotated with @Deprecated(since = "TODO") or @Deprecated(forRemoval = true, since = "TODO"), if applicable.
• New or substantially changed JavaScript is not defined inline and does not call eval to ease future introduction of Content Security Policy (CSP) directives (see documentation).
• For dependency updates, there are links to external changelogs and, if possible, full differentials.
• For new APIs and extension points, there is a link to at least one consumer.

Desired reviewers

@jenkinsci/core-security-review

Maintainer checklist

Before the changes are marked as ready-for-merge:

• There are at least two (2) approvals for the pull request and no outstanding requests for change.
• Conversations in the pull request are over, or it is explicit that a reviewer is not blocking the change.
• Changelog entries in the pull request title and/or Proposed changelog entries are accurate, human-readable, and in the imperative mood.
• Proper changelog labels are set so that the changelog can be generated automatically.
• If the change needs additional upgrade steps from users, the upgrade-guide-needed label is set and there is a Proposed upgrade guidelines section in the pull request title (see example).
• If it would make sense to backport the change to LTS, a Jira issue must exist, be a Bug or Improvement, and be labeled as lts-candidate to be considered (see query).

[Wadeck]

Failures seem related to some ATH changes, re-triggered the build to see if it's confirmed or not.

[github-actions]

Please take a moment and address the merge conflicts of your pull request. Thanks!

[Kevin-CB]

I tested each of these changes locally, they all seems good and correctly remove the reported CSP warnings.