Re: Review Request 128707: Add support for captive portals

-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/128707/#review98901
-----------------------------------------------------------




kded/portalmonitor.h (line 22)
<https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/128707/#comment66585>

    This should go inside if #ifdef section below.



kded/portalmonitor.cpp (line 50)
<https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/128707/#comment66586>

    I am wondering how hard this waill affect kde.org web server. This patch has the potentional to create a DDoS attack-like effect on it. Maybe someone from sysadmin should evaluate this.


- Lamarque Souza


On Aug. 18, 2016, 12:47 p.m., Jan Grulich wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/128707/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Aug. 18, 2016, 12:47 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Network Management, Plasma, KDE Usability, and Lamarque Souza.
> 
> 
> Bugs: 365417
>     http://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=365417
> 
> 
> Repository: plasma-nm
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Adds portal monitor to our kded module, which checks NetworkManager connectivity. If the value gets changed to NM_CONNECTIVITY_PORTAL (means we are behind a captive portal), then we open a QWebEngineView trying to load "http://kde.org" page which is supposed to be redirected to the captive portal page. Once user logs in and url changes, we re-check the connectivity again and close the web view if we are no longer behind the captive portal.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   CMakeLists.txt a27c1f2 
>   kded/CMakeLists.txt 1f0613e 
>   kded/portalmonitor.h PRE-CREATION 
>   kded/portalmonitor.cpp PRE-CREATION 
>   kded/service.cpp 18ffd41 
> 
> Diff: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/128707/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Tested with three different captive portals and it worked perfectly.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Jan Grulich
> 
>