Re: MD5 - Re: On the future of and application/x-x509-*-cert MIME handling

2015-09-04 Thread Martin Thomson
Henry, I would rather you attempt to address Ryan's point 5, namely: 5) just generates keys, and relies on application/x-x509-*-cert to install certificates. This MIME handling, unspecified but implemented by major browsers, represents yet-another-way for a website to make persistent modification

MD5 - Re: On the future of and application/x-x509-*-cert MIME handling

2015-09-04 Thread henry . story
On Thursday, 30 July 2015 01:35:52 UTC+2, David Keeler wrote: > [cc'd to dev-security for visibility. This discussion is intended to > happen on dev-platform; please reply to that list.] > > Ryan Sleevi recently announced the pre-intention to deprecate and > eventually remove support for the ele

Re: StructuredCloneHelper

2015-09-04 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 9/4/15 4:12 AM, Andrea Marchesini wrote: 1. we had many postMessage() methods fully out of sync in terms of which clonable/transferable objects we were supporting. Now MessagePort, BroadcastChannel, window and worker and (partially) IPC share the same code base. Thank you for doing that! Th

Re: StructuredCloneHelper

2015-09-04 Thread Nicholas Nethercote
On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 6:12 PM, Andrea Marchesini wrote: > > In these days I landed quite a few patches to replace the use of > JSAutoStructuredCloneBuffer with something "better": StructuredCloneHelper. This might be a good time to mention bug 1106264, which is an OOM seemingly caused by JSAutoS

StructuredCloneHelper

2015-09-04 Thread Andrea Marchesini
Hi all, In these days I landed quite a few patches to replace the use of JSAutoStructuredCloneBuffer with something "better": StructuredCloneHelper. First of all, the reasons why I did it, are: 1. we had many postMessage() methods fully out of sync in terms of which clonable/transferable objects