{"issue":{"user":{"id":1240282,"login":"jsamuel","url":"https://api.github.com/users/jsamuel","avatar_url":"https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/bc1d195cedb959a3946572b08ce9e7c7?d=https://a248.e.akamai.net/assets.github.com%2Fimages%2Fgravatars%2Fgravatar-140.png","gravatar_id":"bc1d195cedb959a3946572b08ce9e7c7"},"milestone":null,"created_at":"2011-12-22T03:58:30Z","title":"Adblock Plus filter subscription downloads are blocked","updated_at":"2011-12-22T03:58:34Z","labels":[{"name":"extension","url":"https://api.github.com/repos/RequestPolicy/requestpolicy/labels/extension","color":"ededed"}],"state":"open","id":2632942,"pull_request":{"patch_url":null,"html_url":null,"diff_url":null},"html_url":"https://github.com/RequestPolicy/requestpolicy/issues/82","closed_at":null,"number":82,"body":"A download like https://easylist-downloads.adblockplus.org/easylist.txt often redirects to http://adblockplus.mozdev.org/easylist/easylist.txt. As it is now, RequestPolicy will block this redirect. Same goes for redirects from the old filter list address (https://easylist.adblockplus.org/easylist.txt) to the new one. I see that you try to deal with this by adding a special \"compatibility rule\" - only that it doesn't consider the new (three months old) server setup. Nor is it considering the setup of filter lists other than EasyList. And I am left wondering why for many users the client fails following redirects.\r\n\r\nIs it really necessary to block redirects in requests coming from extensions? What is the security gain from trying to restrict code that already has full privileges? You can easily detect a privileged request:\r\n\r\n{{{\r\nvar secMan = Components.classes[\"@mozilla.org/scriptsecuritymanager;1\"]\r\n                       .getService(Components.interfaces.nsIScriptSecurityManager);\r\nvar principal = secMan.getChannelPrincipal(channel);\r\nif (secMan.isSystemPrincipal(principal))\r\n{\r\n  // Ignore requests from privileged code\r\n  return;\r\n}\r\n}}}\r\n\r\nThis will eliminate all your extension and application compatibility issues.","url":"https://api.github.com/repos/RequestPolicy/requestpolicy/issues/82","comments":3,"assignee":null},"comment":{"user":{"id":1240282,"login":"jsamuel","url":"https://api.github.com/users/jsamuel","avatar_url":"https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/bc1d195cedb959a3946572b08ce9e7c7?d=https://a248.e.akamai.net/assets.github.com%2Fimages%2Fgravatars%2Fgravatar-140.png","gravatar_id":"bc1d195cedb959a3946572b08ce9e7c7"},"created_at":"2011-12-22T03:58:33Z","updated_at":"2011-12-22T03:58:33Z","id":3243836,"body":"[Wladimir Palant] nsIContentPolicy isn't triggered for requests made by chrome documents (starting with Firefox 3.0 from what I remember). So redirects are really the only problem.","url":"https://api.github.com/repos/RequestPolicy/requestpolicy/issues/comments/3243836"},"action":"created"}