Skip to content

Feature policy pragma #4670

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Open
wants to merge 6 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Feature policy pragma #4670

wants to merge 6 commits into from

Conversation

@eeeps
Copy link
Contributor

@eeeps eeeps commented May 31, 2019 •
edited by pr-preview bot
Loading

This is an in-progress, not-ready-to-merge PR, meant to concretely hash out the issues raised in this issue.

Here’s it's companion PR, in Feature-Policy.

  • At least two implementers are interested (and none opposed):
    • Chrome: TBD
    • Safari: TBD
    • Firefox: TBD
  • Tests are written and can be reviewed and commented upon at:
    • …
  • Implementation bugs are filed:
    • Chrome: …
    • Firefox: …
    • Safari: …

💥 Error: Wattsi server error 💥

PR Preview failed to build. (Last tried on Jan 15, 2021, 7:59 AM UTC).

More

PR Preview relies on a number of web services to run. There seems to be an issue with the following one:

🚨 Wattsi Server - Wattsi Server is the web service used to build the WHATWG HTML spec.

🔗 Related URL

<html>
<head><title>504 Gateway Time-out</title></head>
<body bgcolor="white">
<center><h1>504 Gateway Time-out</h1></center>
<hr><center>nginx/1.10.3</center>
</body>
</html>

If you don't have enough information above to solve the error by yourself (or to understand to which web service the error is related to, if any), please file an issue.

@eeeps eeeps mentioned this pull request May 31, 2019
Open
@domenic
Copy link
Member

domenic commented Jun 1, 2019

Note that if this lands, #4606 cannot land, as discussed there. /cc @dtapuska

@annevk annevk added the needs implementer interest Moving the issue forward requires implementers to express interest label Jun 3, 2019
@eeeps
Copy link
Contributor Author

eeeps commented Jun 5, 2019

@domenic :

This does mean we're closing the door on being able to deliver feature policy via in-document mechanisms like <meta>, since by that time it'll be too late (the agent will already be in its cluster).

There's language in the companion PR, which I largely borrowed from the CSP spec, stating that “policies in <meta> elements are not applied to content which precedes them”.

I'd suggest adding something like "or to the document itself" there, but your comment makes me think there are more fundamental issues afoot. Why can't <meta>-delivery support a subset of HTTP-delivery's policies, ala CSP?

@eeeps eeeps mentioned this pull request Mar 3, 2020
Closed
Base automatically changed from master to main January 15, 2021 07:57
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

No reviews

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

needs implementer interest Moving the issue forward requires implementers to express interest

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

@eeeps @domenic @annevk