http: relax writeEarlyHints validations #46464
Open
+206
−136
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Review requested:
|
nodejs-github-bot
added
http
Removes the requirement that every call to writeEarlyHints include a `link` header. While the `link` header is clearly the most common usage of `103 Early Hints`, I could find no requirement to include a `link` header as part of [RFC8297](https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8297.html). Additionally this removes the existing incorrect validation of the Link header format in favor of only validating that it is a valid header value. While the validation could be updated to better match [RFC8288 Section 3](https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8288.html#section-3), it appears it would be the only place in the node.js code base where we proactively validate header values beyond verifying they are valid at the HTTP protocol layer. Fixes: nodejs#46453
khalsah
force-pushed
the
relax-early-hints-validation
branch
from
1e641e5
to
78dd37e
Compare
khalsah
changed the title
anonrig
reviewed
Feb 1, 2023
| } | ||
|
|
||
| if (linkHeaderValue.length === 0) { | ||
| return false; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I understand the need to remove regexp but why don't we keep the primitive checks as it is?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This check skips sending 103 Early Hints all together if no link header is present. Which would be confusing if you're trying to send early hints with some other header. Admittedly I'm not aware of any current need to send 103 Early Hints without a link header, but by my reading the RFC doesn't mandate the link header in any way.
|
While the RFC mandates no formal specification for the early hints, I would keep the validation and therefore I'm towards accepting #46466 in favor of this. |
|
SRHerzog
added a commit
to SRHerzog/node
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 17, 2023
Updated regex for "Link" header validation to better match the specification in RFC 8288 section 3. Does not check for valid URI format but handles the rest of the header more permissively than before. Alternative to another outstanding PR that disables validation entirely. Fixes: nodejs#46453 Refs: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8288.html#section-3 Refs: nodejs#46464
nodejs-github-bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 23, 2023
Updated regex for "Link" header validation to better match the specification in RFC 8288 section 3. Does not check for valid URI format but handles the rest of the header more permissively than before. Alternative to another outstanding PR that disables validation entirely. Fixes: #46453 Refs: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8288.html#section-3 Refs: #46464 PR-URL: #46466 Reviewed-By: Yagiz Nizipli <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Paolo Insogna <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]>
targos
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 13, 2023
Updated regex for "Link" header validation to better match the specification in RFC 8288 section 3. Does not check for valid URI format but handles the rest of the header more permissively than before. Alternative to another outstanding PR that disables validation entirely. Fixes: #46453 Refs: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8288.html#section-3 Refs: #46464 PR-URL: #46466 Reviewed-By: Yagiz Nizipli <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Paolo Insogna <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]>
danielleadams
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 11, 2023
Updated regex for "Link" header validation to better match the specification in RFC 8288 section 3. Does not check for valid URI format but handles the rest of the header more permissively than before. Alternative to another outstanding PR that disables validation entirely. Fixes: #46453 Refs: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8288.html#section-3 Refs: #46464 PR-URL: #46466 Reviewed-By: Yagiz Nizipli <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Paolo Insogna <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Removes the requirement that every call to writeEarlyHints include a
linkheader. While thelinkheader is clearly the most common usage of103 Early Hints, I could find no requirement to include alinkheader as part of RFC8297.Additionally this removes the existing incorrect validation of the Link header format in favor of only validating that it is a valid header value. While the validation could be updated to better match RFC8288 Section 3, it appears it would be the only place in the node.js code base where we proactively validate header values beyond verifying they are valid at the HTTP protocol layer.
Fixes: #46453