Confirmed users
431
edits
Necko: Electrolysis design and subprojects: Difference between revisions
Necko: Electrolysis design and subprojects (view source)
Revision as of 23:52, 27 August 2009
, 27 August 2009→General design/architecture issues
| Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
==== Validating data ==== | ==== Validating data ==== | ||
Lucas suggested that IPDL parent actors should take measures to validate data passed to them by children, in case the latter have been compromised (ex: validating that strings are actually UTF-16). In necko's case, that should mainly be the URI and other data for the initial request, but keep in mind for other IPC exchanges, too. | Lucas suggested that IPDL parent actors should take measures to validate data passed to them by children, in case the latter have been compromised (ex: validating that strings are actually UTF-16). In necko's case, that should mainly be the URI and other data for the initial request, but keep in mind for other IPC exchanges, too. | ||
== HTTP and general necko issues == | |||
==== HTTP Headers ==== | ==== HTTP Headers ==== | ||
| Line 78: | Line 80: | ||
* bz would like to rework this API anyway | * bz would like to rework this API anyway | ||
== FTP == | |||
* Doug Turner knows this code. | * Doug Turner knows this code. | ||
* Proposal from bsmedberg: we keep FTP purely within the chrome process, so that we don't need to make it IPC-savvy. | * Proposal from bsmedberg: we keep FTP purely within the chrome process, so that we don't need to make it IPC-savvy. | ||