Skip to content
This repository was archived by the owner on Nov 6, 2023. It is now read-only.
This repository was archived by the owner on Nov 6, 2023. It is now read-only.

Re-activate top-100 from #10538 #10545

Closed
Closed

Description

@cschanaj

#10536 #10538 I cannot do this all myself. Please mark this as a Good Volunteer Work. Thanks!

top-100

Activity

  1. Bisaloo commented on Jun 21, 2017

    @Bisaloo
    Collaborator
  2. Bisaloo commented on Jun 21, 2017

    @Bisaloo
    Collaborator
  3. Bisaloo commented on Jun 21, 2017

    @Bisaloo
    Collaborator

    @Hainish, but ultimately, those lists are pulled from hstspreload.org, right ? There is simply a delay before domains are included in the lists you mention.

    This form is used to submit domains for inclusion in Chrome's HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS) preload list. This is a list of sites that are hardcoded into Chrome as being HTTPS only.

    Most major browsers (Chrome, Firefox, Opera, Safari, IE 11 and Edge) also have HSTS preload lists based on the Chrome list. (See the HSTS compatibility matrix.)

    That's how I understand this at least. Please tell me if I am mistaken.

  4. Hainish commented on Jun 21, 2017

    @Hainish
    Member

    The browsers are based on the Chrome list, yes. But it may take a while before they are included in the browsers, so we don't want to remove the rules that are preloaded from the canonical source prematurely and leave them actually unprotected in the browsers.

  5. Hainish commented on Jun 21, 2017

    @Hainish
    Member

    Also Mozilla has its own logic for removing preloaded domains, and it's often changing and not documented very well. So we can't count on the Mozilla implementation mirroring the Chrome list very closely.

  6. added this to the Before the Next Release milestone on Jun 22, 2017
  7. cschanaj commented on Jun 22, 2017

    @cschanaj
    CollaboratorAuthor

    I've just found out that Yahoo.xml was whitelisted in the ruleset-coverage-whitelist.txt. The file contain 2.4k+ lines and involves dozens of complicated rules, I don't think that anyone can re-activate it before the next release without paying significant effort ...

  8. Bisaloo commented on Jun 22, 2017

    @Bisaloo
    Collaborator

    I've just found out that Yahoo.xml was whitelisted in the ruleset-coverage-whitelist.txt. The file contain 2k+ lines and involves dozens of complicated rules, I don't think that anyone can re-activate it before the next release without significant effort ...

    Agreed. This is why we should keep different domains in separate rulesets. Updating behemoths such as Yahoo.xml is no fun and this leaves all domains unprotected.

  9. cschanaj commented on Jun 22, 2017

    @cschanaj
    CollaboratorAuthor

    If nobody can re-activate Yahoo.xml before the next release, I suggest to revert the changes from 9bf49cb on Yahoo.xml and whitelist it again. This gives us the time to rewrite the ruleset while keeping the domain protected.

    Remark: original file prior to the comprehensive-fetch Yahoo.xml

  10. Hainish commented on Jun 22, 2017

    @Hainish
    Member

    It seems like at the very least we should remove the problematic domains flagged by the fetch test, even if we don't have time to go through the entire rule and simplify it.

  11. Hainish commented on Jul 5, 2017

    @Hainish
    Member

    Closing, since this seems to be done now.

  12. J0WI commented on Jul 6, 2017

    @J0WI
    Contributor

    Thanks!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions