Skip to content
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

Improve designs for dynamic lookup the source of a block #56

Open
Gudahtt opened this issue Feb 14, 2023 · 6 comments
Open

Improve designs for dynamic lookup the source of a block #56

Gudahtt opened this issue Feb 14, 2023 · 6 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@Gudahtt
Copy link
Member

Gudahtt commented Feb 14, 2023

Due to a recent change in how we are distributing our phishing configuration, we will no longer have access to the source of a block by the time this page is rendered. That is, we won't know whether the site was blocked by our configuration, or by the Phishfort configuration.

We can workaround this problem by dynamically looking up all sets of phishing configuration MetaMask is currently expected to be using, and comparing the blocked site with each one. However this operation would take a few seconds and it might incur substantial hosting costs, so we should not wait on this during the initial page load.

My suggestion would be to lookup this information after the user has clicked the "dispute block" button, so that we route them to the correct page for disputing that block. Alternatively, we could also perform this dynamic lookup when the user clicks "See more information" or something like that.

@Gudahtt Gudahtt added the enhancement New feature or request label Feb 14, 2023
@holantonela
Copy link

My suggestion would be to lookup this information after the user has clicked the "dispute block" button, so that we route them to the correct page for disputing that block.

That works for me. We can have a static line with all the lists we are consuming with a link to each repo. When the user wants to [Report a detection problem], we open an issue in the blaming repo.

What should we do if more than one list reports the same domain? Should we use our lists as the first option?

Is this a blocker for the new phishing warning page @Gudahtt?

@Gudahtt
Copy link
Member Author

Gudahtt commented Feb 15, 2023

Is this a blocker for the new phishing warning page @Gudahtt?

Nope! But it's a blocker to us adopting the new phishing controller update, which is also urgent. My plan was to get something working for this quickly, then revisit to improve it as necessary.

What should we do if more than one list reports the same domain? Should we use our lists as the first option?

Good question. I wasn't sure about this either. Defaulting to us makes sense for now, but it'd be nice to show all lists that block the site instead.

@holantonela
Copy link

holantonela commented Feb 15, 2023

Nope! But it's a blocker to us adopting the new phishing controller update, which is also urgent. My plan was to get something working for this quickly, then revisit to improve it as necessary.

Sounds good. Should we have #52 merged first? So we also unblock PS on this.

but it'd be nice to show all lists that block the site instead.

We can do a [Details] toggle in a v2.1. Made a quick proto here.

@Gudahtt
Copy link
Member Author

Gudahtt commented Feb 15, 2023

That prototype looks great!

We'll need some sort of loading indicator for after the user clicks "Details" as well. I'll ask in Slack about which to use.

@Gudahtt Gudahtt changed the title Dynamically lookup the source of a block IMprove designs for dynamic lookup the source of a block Feb 17, 2023
@Gudahtt
Copy link
Member Author

Gudahtt commented Feb 17, 2023

The initial implementation of this was in #57 with minimal design changes. I will work on the design changes next, leaving this issue open until they are completed.

@Gudahtt Gudahtt changed the title IMprove designs for dynamic lookup the source of a block Improve designs for dynamic lookup the source of a block Mar 9, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants