FTA:
The MPAA is getting pretty desperate, it seems. MPAA boss Chris Dodd was out trying to defend censoring the internet this week by using China as an example of why censorship isn’t a problem. It’s kind of shocking, really.
“When the Chinese told Google that they had to block sites or they couldn’t do [business] in their country, they managed to figure out how to block sites.”
Shortly after joining the Internet Explorer team I got a bug from a PM on a popular Microsoft web server product that I'll leave unnamed (from now on UWS). The bug said that IE was handling empty path segments incorrectly by not removing them before resolving dotted path segments. For example UWS would do the following:
A.1. http://example.com/a/b//../
A.2. http://example.com/a/b/../
A.3. http://example.com/a/
In step 1 they are given a URI with dotted path segment and an empty
path segment. In step 2 they remove the empty path segment, and in step 3 they resolve the dotted path segment. Whereas, given the same initial URI, IE would do the following:
B.1. http://example.com/a/b//../
B.2. http://example.com/a/b/
IE simply resolves the dotted path segment against the empty path segment and removes them both. So, how
did I resolve this bug? As "By Design" of course!
The URI RFC allows path segments of zero length and does not assign them any special meaning. So generic user agents that intend to work on the web must not treat an empty path segment any different from a path segment with some text in it. In the case above IE is doing the correct thing.
That's the case for generic user agents, however servers may decide that a URI with an empty path segment returns the same resource as a the same URI without that empty path segment. Essentially they can decide to ignore empty path segments. Both IIS and Apache work this way and thus return the same resource for the following URIs:
http://exmaple.com/foo//bar///baz
http://example.com/foo/bar/baz
The issue for UWS is that it removes empty path segments before resolving dotted path segments. It must
follow normal URI procedure before applying its own additional rules for empty path segments. Not doing that means they end up violating URI equivalency rules: URIs (A.1) and (B.2) are equivalent
but UWS will not return the same resource for them.
A bug came up the other day involving markup containing <input type="image" src="http://example.com/...
. I knew that "image" was a valid input type but it wasn't until that moment
that I realized I didn't know what it did. Looking it up I found that it displays the specified image and when the user clicks on the image, the form is submitted with an additional two name
value pairs: the x and y positions of the point at which the user clicked the image.
Take for example the following HTML:
<form action="http://example.com/">
<input type="image" name="foo" src="http://deletethis.net/dave/images/davebefore.jpg">
</form>
If the user
clicks on the image, the browser will submit the form with a URI like the following:http://example.com/?foo.x=145&foo.y=124
.
This seemed like an incredibly specific feature to be built directly into the language when this could instead be done with javascript. I looked a bit further and saw that its been in HTML since at least HTML2, which of course makes much more sense. Javascript barely existed at that point and sending off the user's click location in a form may have been the only way to do something interesting with that action.
#!/bin/bash
function f() {
sleep "$1"
echo "$1"
}
while [ -n "$1" ]
do
f "$1" &
shift
done
wait
example usage:
./sleepsort.bash 5 3 6 3 6 3 1 4 7
"I used FiddlerCore in GeolocMock to edit HTTPS responses and ran into two stumbling blocks that I'll document here. The first is that I didn't check if the Fiddler root cert existed or was installed, which of course is necessary to edit HTTPS traffic. The following is my code where I check for the certs.
if (!Fiddler.CertMaker.rootCertExists())
{
if (!Fiddler.CertMaker.createRootCert())
{
throw new Exception("Unable to create cert for FiddlerCore.");
}
}
if (!Fiddler.CertMaker.rootCertIsTrusted())
{
if (!Fiddler.CertMaker.trustRootCert())
{
throw new Exception("Unable to install FiddlerCore's cert.");
}
}
The second problem I had (which would have been solved had I read all the sample code first) was that my changes weren't being applied. In my app I only need the BeforeResponse but in order to modify the response I must also sign up for the BeforeRequest event and mark the bBufferResponse flag on the session before the response comes back. For example:
Fiddler.FiddlerApplication.BeforeRequest += new SessionStateHandler(FiddlerApplication_BeforeRequest);
Fiddler.FiddlerApplication.BeforeResponse += new SessionStateHandler(FiddlerApplication_BeforeResponse);
...
private void FiddlerApplication_BeforeRequest(Session oSession)
{
if (IsInterestingSession(oSession))
{
oSession.bBufferResponse = true;
}
}
For my GeolocMock weekend project I intended to use the Bing Maps API to display a map in a WebBrowser control and allow the user to interact with that to select a location to be consumed by my application. Getting my .NET code to talk to the JavaScript in the WebBrowser control was surprisingly easy.
To have .NET execute JavaScript code you can use the InvokeScript method passing the name of the JavaScript function to execute and an object array of parameters to pass:
this.webBrowser2.Document.InvokeScript("onLocationStateChanged",
new object[] {
latitudeTextBoxText,
longitudeTextBoxText,
altitudeTextBoxText,
uncertaintyTextBoxText
});
The other direction, having JavaScript call into .NET is slightly more complicated but still pretty easy as far as language interop goes. The first step is to mark your assembly as ComVisible so that it can interact with JavaScript via COM. VS had already added a ComVisible declaration to my project I just had to change the value to true.
[assembly: ComVisible(true)]
Next set ObjectForScripting attribute to the object you want to expose to JavaScript.
this.webBrowser2.ObjectForScripting = this.locationState;
Now that object is exposed as window.external in JavaScript and you can call methods on it.
window.external.Set(lat, long, alt, gUncert);
However you don't seem to be able to test for the existence of methods off of it. For example the following JavaScript generates an exception for me even though I have a Set method:
if (window.external && window.external.Set) {
I've made two simple command line tools related to the console window and Win7 jump lists. The source is available for both but neither is much more than the sort of samples you'd find on MSDN =).
SetAppUserModelId lets you change the Application User Model ID for the current console window. The AppUserModelId is the value Win7 uses to group together icons on the task bar and is what the task bar's jump lists are associated with. The tool lets you change that as well as the icon and name that appear in the task bar for the window, and the command to launch if the user attempts to re-launch the application from its task bar icon.
SetJumpList lets you set the jump list associated with a particular AppUserModelId. You pass the AppUserModelId as the only parameter and then in its standard input you give it lines specifying items that should appear in the jump list and what to execute when those items are picked.
I put these together to make my build environment easier to deal with at work. I have to deal with multiple enlistments in many different branches and so I wrote a simple script around these two tools to group my build windows by branch name in the task bar, and to add the history of commands I've used to launch the build environment console windows to the jump list of each.