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

Spec: Wait for network revocation in nested fenced frames before disabling network. #176

Merged
merged 39 commits into from
Jan 7, 2025

Conversation

blu25
Copy link
Collaborator

@blu25 blu25 commented Aug 14, 2024

This PR introduces a new algorithm: Recalculate the untrusted network status of all frames. This is called whenever a fenced frame marks its network as disabled, and checks to see if any ancestor fenced frames are now allowed to have their network access be fully revoked and gain access to unpartitioned data.

This PR modifies disableUntrustedNetwork() to not resolve the promise, and instead puts the promise into the fenced frame config instance to be resolved once the frame tree is considered to have its network fully revoked.

This builds off of the work in #146, and this should only be merged after #146 is merged.

See: issue #168


Preview | Diff

Copy link
Collaborator

@domfarolino domfarolino left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Haven't made it through everything quite yet but getting there. This is a start for now.

spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@blu25 blu25 self-assigned this Oct 30, 2024
@blu25 blu25 requested a review from domfarolino November 1, 2024 18:47
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@blu25 blu25 requested a review from domfarolino November 5, 2024 17:30
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@blu25 blu25 requested a review from domfarolino December 6, 2024 23:03
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Show resolved Hide resolved
@blu25 blu25 requested a review from domfarolino December 11, 2024 19:26
Copy link
Collaborator

@domfarolino domfarolino left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

One more issue I spotted is that the https://wicg.github.io/fenced-frame/#revoke-network-for-a-partition-nonce algorithm uses "this" which it cannot do since it is called from an in parallel context. I think we should fix that in this PR.

spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@blu25
Copy link
Collaborator Author

blu25 commented Dec 12, 2024

One more issue I spotted is that the https://wicg.github.io/fenced-frame/#revoke-network-for-a-partition-nonce algorithm uses "this" which it cannot do since it is called from an in parallel context. I think we should fix that in this PR.

Modified to take in a relevant settings object instead of using this.

@blu25 blu25 requested a review from domfarolino December 12, 2024 18:47
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@blu25 blu25 requested a review from domfarolino January 2, 2025 20:09
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec.bs Show resolved Hide resolved
@domfarolino domfarolino merged commit ffd3d63 into master Jan 7, 2025
2 checks passed
@domfarolino domfarolino deleted the liam-nested-revocation branch January 7, 2025 23:10
github-actions bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 7, 2025
…bling network (#176)

SHA: ffd3d63
Reason: push, by domfarolino

Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants