[ ijbswa-Bugs-3423274 ] Unblock reason is ignored by CGI
SourceForge.net <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.web.privoxy.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Bugs item #3423274, was opened at 2011-10-13 22:55
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by fabiankeil
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=111118&aid=3423274&group_id=11118
Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread,
including the initial issue submission, for this request,
not just the latest update.
Category: funct: cgi
Group: None
>Status: Pending
>Resolution: Accepted
Priority: 5
Private: No
Submitted By: dg1727 (dg1727)
>Assigned to: Fabian Keil (fabiankeil)
Summary: Unblock reason is ignored by CGI
Initial Comment:
Privoxy 3.0.17 on Xubuntu 11.04, no other firewalls/proxies, Firefox 7.0.1
The CGI page http://config.privoxy.org/show-url-info?url=... seems to ignore "unblock reasons." Suppose the following is in an actionsfile:
{-block{why_we_need_this_URL}}
This just appears on the CGI page as "{-block}".
It would be nice if the "why_we_need_this_URL" could be shown in the CGI page. Thanks.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
>Comment By: Fabian Keil (fabiankeil)
Date: 2011-10-14 16:36
Message:
It's not the CGI page that is ignoring the "unblock reason", but Privoxy
itself is skipping it when loading the action file.
In general parameters for actions that aren't disabled aren't documented
to work and have no defined meaning.
The current undefined behavior is that they are silently ignored, but this
would change once TODO list item #22 is implemented at which point Privoxy
would start to complain about the syntax error.
I agree that supporting "unblock reasons" would be even better, but
implementing them would require a non-trivial amount of changes to
Privoxy's action logic and given the length of our TODO list, I'm not sure
that the time would be well spent.
I'll have to think about it some more, but at the moment I think treating
"unblock reasons" as the syntax error they are is the way to go.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=111118&aid=3423274&group_id=11118
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a
definitive record of customers, application performance, security
threats, fraudulent activity and more. Splunk takes this data and makes
sense of it. Business sense. IT sense. Common sense.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2d-oct