-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2k
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
http parser non strict mode #2332
Changes from all commits
ab71f81
d1c7a66
8a868e0
cb101bc
c7dbebc
337bc01
bae044f
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1 @@ | ||
Build http-parser extension in non-strict mode by default. | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I'm not sure we want non-strict mode by default. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Also, does this switch implies that we have to ship two wheels with strict and non strict parsers? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Why not? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. According the sources, this check does a bit more than just allow non-ascii characters in URL. If I read correctly, users may send "GET / OLOLO/1.1" requests without worry about, servers may return malformed status codes, etc. I don't think we want to support this. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Hm, then I read it wrong way. What exact it controls then? Can't found any documentation about. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. After brief overview I've found the following behavior changes for non-strict mode. It allows
Also looks like it has relaxed checks for There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. @asvetlov Thanks! Are we ok with 1, 3 and 4? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I think yes. It doesn't raise security issues IMHO |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Good catch!
I was wondering why I don't see the line in console output :)