On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 2:18 PM Tom Komarnicki <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Hey,
>
> Sorry for necro'ing this thread, I'm aware that this has been on the
> "done" pile for a while - and maybe it should've been brought up earlier,
> but how do you "disable" this feature ? It's making the BE dev exhaustingly
> painful, not being able to intercept requests and re-forward them to the
> local BE.
> Is there a flag, or whatnot, to re-enable the old flow ?
>

Can you expand on the issue you're hitting? By "BE" do you mean backend? Or
something else?


> Thanks
>
> On Tuesday 5 September 2023 at 18:29:10 UTC+3 Chris Harrelson wrote:
>
>> LGTM3
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 5, 2023 at 8:27 AM Mike Taylor <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> LGTM2
>>> On 9/3/23 8:12 PM, Yoav Weiss wrote:
>>>
>>> LGTM1
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Sep 4, 2023 at 2:24 AM Kenichi Ishibashi <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi, sorry for the long delay.
>>>>
>>>> The feature page
>>>> <https://chromestatus.com/metrics/feature/timeline/popularity/4470>
>>>> now shows sites that use Authorization header for cross-origin redirects. I
>>>> randomly picked some of them and examined to see if they could work when
>>>> Chrome removes Authorization header up on cross-origin redirects. As far as
>>>> I can tell, none of them are broken. We would like to ship this behind a
>>>> feature flag.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks for the analysis!
>>> As you pointed out elsewhere, since our previous discussions on this
>>> thread, this was shipped
>>> <https://wpt.fyi/results/fetch/api/credentials/authentication-redirection.any.html?label=stable&label=master&aligned>
>>> by Firefox and Safari.
>>> I think that changes the risk calculus (from compat to interop) and
>>> makes shipping this (with a base feature just in case) the right choice.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Sep 1, 2023 at 1:39 AM Ioan-Cristian Linte <
>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Any updates on this?
>>>>> Other browser have already made the change for some time so it's
>>>>> surprising that Chrome is so worried about breaking change.
>>>>>
>>>>> The Authorization propagating in cross origin redirects is causing a
>>>>> performance issue for us. Our server redirects to AWS S3 with pre-signed
>>>>> url and this will return 400 error as AWS S3 disallows specifying multiple
>>>>> authorizations (e.g. signature in url and Authorization header) in a
>>>>> request. Also the 400 error response includes a close connection header. 
>>>>> To
>>>>> make this work, the web client checks for the 400 error and uses the
>>>>> response.url to make a new fetch request without the Authorization header.
>>>>> Because the previous connection was closed this incurs the cost of
>>>>> initiating a new connection.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wednesday, June 28, 2023 at 6:34:42 PM UTC+3 Yoav Weiss wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Friendly ping! :) Any news on UKM data here?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wednesday, April 5, 2023 at 10:53:41 AM UTC+2 Yoav Weiss wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sounds great, thanks!! :)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Apr 5, 2023 at 10:44 AM Kenichi Ishibashi <
>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Yoav,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sorry I haven't sent an update in this thread. (1) sounds
>>>>>>>> reasonable. I added the usercounters to UKM a few weeks ago and I'm 
>>>>>>>> waiting
>>>>>>>> for data. I will report back after manual inspections are done.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Apr 5, 2023 at 5:14 PM Yoav Weiss <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Friendly ping on the above :) Does (1) sound reasonable from your
>>>>>>>>> perspective?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 15, 2023 at 7:16 PM Yoav Weiss <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The way I see this, given that the usecounter is an order of
>>>>>>>>>> magnitude higher than what we can consider trivial, we have 3 
>>>>>>>>>> options:
>>>>>>>>>> 1) Add the usecounters to UKM
>>>>>>>>>> <https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:components/page_load_metrics/browser/observers/use_counter/ukm_features.cc;l=32?q=usecounters%20ukm&ss=chromium>,
>>>>>>>>>> run an analysis on early data to extract URLs that use this, and 
>>>>>>>>>> randomly
>>>>>>>>>> sample those for manual inspection.
>>>>>>>>>> 2) Wait for the HTTPArchive crawl to run with this usecounter,
>>>>>>>>>> assuming that unauthed landing pages will trigger it.
>>>>>>>>>> 3) Run an HA query that tries to find cross-origin redirects with
>>>>>>>>>> Auth headers. I'm not sure how easy (or feasible) that would be, but 
>>>>>>>>>> Rick
>>>>>>>>>> and Pat would know
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> To me, (1) seems to be the easiest, and with the least amount of
>>>>>>>>>> potential bias (all pages vs. unauthed landing pages).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 9:45 PM Patrick Meenan <
>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Do we expect the Authorization header to be something that the
>>>>>>>>>>> HTTP Archive triggers in a way that the feature will trigger?  
>>>>>>>>>>> Since they
>>>>>>>>>>> are all unauthenticated single page loads, it feels like it's 
>>>>>>>>>>> unlikely to
>>>>>>>>>>> be something that we hit.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 4:37 PM Patrick Meenan <
>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Looks like the feature flag was added Feb 16
>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/4235597>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  which
>>>>>>>>>>>> looks like it should have made the 112 branch point
>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://chromiumdash.appspot.com/schedule>.  If we hold the
>>>>>>>>>>>> April crawl back a couple of days and start it on the 4th after 
>>>>>>>>>>>> stable is
>>>>>>>>>>>> released then we can pick it up in April, otherwise it would show 
>>>>>>>>>>>> up
>>>>>>>>>>>> mid-crawl.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 4:24 PM Rick Viscomi <
>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Am I reading the feature page
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://chromestatus.com/feature/5195900413018112> correctly
>>>>>>>>>>>>> that it'll land in stable version 113? If so, HTTP Archive 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> wouldn't pick
>>>>>>>>>>>>> that up until the May crawl.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> cc @Patrick Meenan to keep me honest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 13, 2023 at 12:19 AM Yoav Weiss <
>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's possible that we need to wait for the next HA run to get
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> actual examples.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +Rick Viscomi would know..
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 13, 2023 at 12:28 AM Kenichi Ishibashi <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you Yoav for the suggestion. I couldn't find sample
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> URLs from the HTTPArchive data (feature usage
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://chromestatus.com/metrics/feature/timeline/popularity/4470>).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'll add a feature flag to prepare for reverting this change if 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> breakage is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> problematic.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 10, 2023 at 7:06 PM Yoav Weiss <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> One option to tighten the potential for breakage would be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to e.g. sample 10 URLs that are hitting that usecounter (e.g. 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> HTTPArchive data), and test them manually to see how many of 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> them would
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> break once this change is applied. Based on the number you'd 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> get, we can
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> estimate the magnitude of breakage we can expect to see in the 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wild.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Another option would be to roll this out with a base
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> feature flag (that we'd want anyway) and be ready to revert if 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> breakage is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more than we'd like.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Combining those two options is probably safest.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 10, 2023 at 8:51 AM Kenichi Ishibashi <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Use counter reports 0.022%. My guess is that most usage
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> happens accidentally but we are not sure.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> API owners, should we do a reverse OT?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Feb 17, 2023 at 9:38 AM Kenichi Ishibashi <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Quick update, we added a use counter to see how often
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this could happen. I'll get back once we have data.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 11:51 PM Yoav Weiss <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any use counters on how often this happens?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, February 2, 2023 at 8:58:35 AM UTC+1
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kenichi Ishibashi wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Contact [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Specificationhttps://fetch.spec.whatwg.org/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #http-redirect-fetch
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Summary
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Remove Authorization header on cross origin redirects to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> scope a developer-controlled Authorization header to the 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> origin of the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> initial request.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Blink componentBlink>Loader
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/list?q=component:Blink%3ELoader>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> TAG review
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not applicable, the spec has been already updated.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/whatwg/fetch/pull/1544
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> TAG review statusNot applicable
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Risks
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Interoperability and Compatibility
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Low. All browser vendors agreed with this change.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Gecko*: Shipping (https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> show_bug.cgi?id=1802086)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do we know if they ran into any compat issues when
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shipping this?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> None I'm aware of. I checked the bug and related issues
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in GitHub but I didn't find anything.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *WebKit*: Shipped/Shipping (
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=230935)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Historically Safari always removed Authorization headers 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> even for the same
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> origin redirects. Recently the behavior has changed to 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> preserve them on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> same origin redirects.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That's encouraging in terms of lack of potential
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reliance on these headers.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Web developers*: No signals
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Other signals*:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WebView application risks
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> N/A
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Debuggability
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Web Developers can use DevTools network panel to see the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> actual request headers.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Will this feature be supported on all six Blink
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platforms (Windows, Mac, Linux, Chrome OS, Android, and 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Android WebView)?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is this feature fully tested by web-platform-tests
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/main/docs/testing/web_platform_tests.md>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ?Yes
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://wpt.fyi/results/xhr/xhr-authorization-redirect.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any.html?label=master&label=experimental
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://wpt.fyi/results/fetch/api/credentials/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> authentication-redirection.any.html?label=experimental
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Flag nameNot applicable
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Requires code in //chrome?False
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tracking bughttps://bugs.chromium.org/p/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromium/issues/detail?id=1393520
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Estimated milestones
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> M112
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anticipated spec changes
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The spec has been already updated.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/whatwg/fetch/issues/944
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Status
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://chromestatus.com/feature/5195900413018112
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This intent message was generated by Chrome Platform
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Status <https://chromestatus.com/>.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "blink-dev" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>> an email to [email protected].
>>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAL5BFfWf-jyg-N2Y%2BuGXp6aWAHZA%2BifqOw_Cki7M3UaV1QV9Cg%40mail.gmail.com
>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAL5BFfWf-jyg-N2Y%2BuGXp6aWAHZA%2BifqOw_Cki7M3UaV1QV9Cg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>> .
>>>
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "blink-dev" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>> an email to [email protected].
>>>
>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/01f78357-99e8-4233-8125-1233bd8bc786%40chromium.org
>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/01f78357-99e8-4233-8125-1233bd8bc786%40chromium.org?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>> .
>>>
>>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"blink-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAOmohS%2Bdjyw27b-czab4fAKYPSMBh8AfxJJvRu%3DtZc5PgAGTcQ%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to