Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

"strict mixed content checking flag" not defined for environment settings objects #18

Open
annevk opened this issue Feb 11, 2019 · 7 comments
Assignees

Comments

@annevk
Copy link
Member

annevk commented Feb 11, 2019

At least one algorithm talks about the strict mixed content checking flag of an environment settings object, but points to a flag defined only for Documents and browsing contexts (not sure the latter is correct?). This seems buggy.

Fixing this might help with whatwg/notifications#145.

@mikewest mikewest self-assigned this Feb 12, 2019
@mikewest
Copy link
Member

I agree that that sounds strange.

@carlosjoan91
Copy link
Contributor

I think this is obsolete now since Strict Mixed Content Checking was made obsolete in the current spec, and I can't find any other specs that still refer to the flag. @annevk and @mikewest any objections to closing this?

@mikewest
Copy link
Member

Chrome still ships an implementation of block-all-mixed-content, which I think relied on this concept. Do you intent to unship that? If so, removing the concept seems reasonable. If not, it seems less reasonable. :)

@annevk
Copy link
Member Author

annevk commented Jan 10, 2023

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Headers/Content-Security-Policy/block-all-mixed-content does argue for a negative historical WPT test for that feature.

@carlosjoan91
Copy link
Contributor

Sorry about the delay, it had been a busy past few weeks, but I'm now getting back to this.

annevk: I'm not sure I follow, do you mean we should have a WPT for the lack of enforcement of it?

mikewest: I've just sent an intent to remove to fully unship block-all-mixed-content in Chrome.

@annevk
Copy link
Member Author

annevk commented Feb 6, 2023

@carlosjoan91 yeah, for features that have been implemented at some point (and sometimes still are), but are not currently standardized. See the various historical.* files in WPT.

@carlosjoan91
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks for clarifying, I was not aware of those. Adding one to check for the lack of strict mixed content checking enforcement SGTM, I'll try to put one together

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants