From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: daniel watson Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#65973: [PATCH] ; send filename, not full path, on EWW form submit Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2024 07:34:48 -0800 Message-ID: <87zfmciczm.fsf@trent-reznor> References: <86bjyttxql.fsf@gnu.org> <4215339a-e797-6198-2e40-8d577e1fec42@gmail.com> <87y11x11l2.fsf@sebasmonia.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="11583"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: mu4e 1.10.8; emacs 29.3 Cc: Jim Porter , Eli Zaretskii , 65973@debbugs.gnu.org, ozzloy@gmail.com To: =?UTF-8?Q?Sebasti=C3=A1n_?= =?UTF-8?Q?Mon=C3=ADa?= Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Nov 06 18:33:40 2024 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1t8juW-0002nV-Gx for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 06 Nov 2024 18:33:40 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1t8ju7-0000Xl-8O; Wed, 06 Nov 2024 12:33:15 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1t8jtz-0000XJ-SY for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Nov 2024 12:33:09 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:5::43]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1t8jtv-0004EX-8S for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Nov 2024 12:33:07 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=debbugs.gnu.org; s=debbugs-gnu-org; h=MIME-Version:In-reply-to:Date:From:References:To:Subject; bh=Zm3v8fZWgah2eQH/3ypy1Y8DX++H7LO12VBa42LaB+0=; b=Xpsr68YDf+P/XGGB04Xm0hYB3iuyoburJDeX87IUwOA1Du2XVN7q3K3yPkgK5Em7bXdr4Ly44mDMhdpjqlNdqXQYJ1HCNQT3GpBo0RFKRq9Whzp3GGuRlwa2jAHG3Mfk41CraCm3bOpzZFoCyIc9OEzAoC81uWMyTaDC9NPj2bVBlKrcrBfwV9s0UL9yIXhAoC1nBX1Kw9FfZVkawwVfk75s/vsWdldLmvAVB35KoDZ2T6qLFbtl32V1oJZIvQsRlwtx++97M9nt8Zi9RaviCuscKiKvMnYrR+Qe9cb7NW91hfFEiXBv+w5PU1d/dedw4Xl4YlgGdP2s/MhK9DHbsA==; Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t8jtt-00031g-SD for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Nov 2024 12:33:01 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: daniel watson Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2024 17:33:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 65973 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch Original-Received: via spool by 65973-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B65973.173091432511548 (code B ref 65973); Wed, 06 Nov 2024 17:33:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 65973) by debbugs.gnu.org; 6 Nov 2024 17:32:05 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:45342 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t8jsx-000308-7X for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 06 Nov 2024 12:32:05 -0500 Original-Received: from mailserver.each.do ([208.85.243.232]:37810) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t8iEV-0006Ya-Ac for 65973@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 06 Nov 2024 10:46:13 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=each.do; s=mail; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID: In-reply-to:Date:Subject:Cc:To:From:References:From; bh=Zm3v8fZWgah2eQH/3ypy1Y8DX++H7LO12VBa42LaB+0=; b=pEE2pZk29Uqi4RYYWZC1p6ijVg hTCaQAbPQWLcv4TiTMbeiHMjy+uIWeRf3i9v4+Deylz+8Q8Jvx10TBr25u7yC2NPr9bhQGfq2w6wP H8exoCZAm++mhziK6hSh4rT2amfz6oPtbq9par9VhDKLAi1OZcRCUEXO+K0ML/s0L81BgMqrc55P3 0LZapXN9r4Vg25Q0R52cC013F35D+MSrYk2RHX/ajY48uJr3Fsa3p0j2dPlW06uiTyHA9m6Rx+qnW yLLk7o6qE6XvA3ikbum89vTGPrHA46yK6GyVYQ+ItrsXBhCXqdioDx09/QugYUKm0/hlSezktEdXA U3Blcu/Q==; Original-Received: from [2601:646:a100:592d:a1e3:d0e7:865c:9ae6] (helo=trent-reznor) by mailserver.each.do with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1t8iCN-00935E-9Y; Wed, 06 Nov 2024 07:43:59 -0800 In-reply-to: <87y11x11l2.fsf@sebasmonia.com> X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 06 Nov 2024 12:32:01 -0500 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:294975 Archived-At: the rationale was initially #1. every other browser i looked into sent the filename only. based on that, i was more confident that it was worth submitting a patch. #3 seems like a good reason too, but i did not know about that until reading this thread. Sebasti=C3=A1n Mon=C3=ADa writes: > Jim Porter writes: >> On 11/5/2024 9:08 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >>> I'd like some rationale for this change. The original report never >>> explains why sending the full absolute file name to the server is bad. >> >> I see three possible reasons: 1) there could be (probably minor) >> privacy issues with sending the directory structure along to a server; >> 2) as far as I'm aware, other browsers only pass the "leaf" of the >> filename; 3) RFC 2813 says that *recipients* should ignore any >> directories: [...] >> RFC 2813 is primarily about mail clients, but MDN suggests following >> it in a web context as well: >> . > >> So I think the RFC would suggest that it's *allowed* to send the >> directories in the "filename" field, but since the server is supposed >> to ignore it, there's no benefit to doing so. > > I didn't get as far as Jim did. I assumed the concern was #1, and I knew > the rest of the path is ignored, so figured we should go ahead. > > Regards, > Seb