| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age |
|---|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
When a user clicks "send a test notification," Pilcrow delivers a push message (with a fixed payload) to all active subscriptions. The included client then displays this as a notification, using browser APIs to do so. This lets us verify that push notification works, end to end - and it appears to.
The API endpoint for sending a test notification is not documented. I didn't feel it prudent to extensively document an endpoint that is intended to be temporary and whose side effects are very much subject to change. However, for posterity, the endpoint is
POST /api/push/ping
{}
and the push message payload is
ping
Subscriptions with permanent delivery failures are nuked when we encounter them. Subscriptions with temporary failures cause the `ping` endpoint to return an internal server error, and are not retried. We'll likely want retry logic - including retry logic to handle server restarts - for any more serious use, but for a smoke test, giving up immediately is fine.
To make the push implementation testable, `App` is now generic over it. Tests use a dummy implementation that stores sent messages in memory. This has some significant limitations, documented in the test suite, but it beats sending real notifications to nowhere in tests.
|
| |
|
|
| |
This is a recurring and nameable operation; let's give it a name before we use it further.
|
| |
|
|
| |
This simplifies data flow, at the potential expense of re-rendering HTML more often than strictly necessary. Requiring every path that produces a message-shaped object to pre-render markdown made things more interdependent than intended and slowed me down.
|
| |
|
|
| |
This was a leftover from the idea that different swatches might have different input notations - and they do, but we turned out not to need to style them differently. And, in any event, this class was applied (only) to inputs that _aren't HTML_, because of 01ed82ac4f89810161fbc3aa1cb8e4691fb8938b.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
You can inject Javascript into a swatch that uses `{@html <expr>}` fairly easily. `<script>foo()</script>` doesn't appear to work, but `<img src="x" onerror="foo()">` does, for example. That code then runs with the same access to cookies, and the same access to local data, as the Pilcrow client. This change removes that capability, by replacing the two swatches that exposed it with more limited examples.
I love the generality and flexibility of generic HTML entry here, and I think it might have been useful for swatching components that are generic DOM containers (which both `Message` and `MessageRun` are today), but swatches are a user interface and are exposed to _all_ users. A user who is unfamiliar with HTML and Javascript, but who is persuaded to open a swatch and enter some code into it (think about an attacker who tells their victim "hey check out this funny thing that happens," preying on curiousity, while providing a lightly-obfuscated payload) can then impersonate that user, exfiltrate anything saved locally, or potentially install persistent code using JS' various background-processing APIs. Gnarly stuff.
We're not up to mitigating that in place. Anyone who knows JS can likely learn to build the client from source, and can experiment with arbitrary input that way, taking responsibility for the results in the process, while anyone who doesn't is unlikely to be persuaded to set up an entire Node toolchain just for an exploit.
|
| |\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
| | | | | | | | | | |/ |
|
| | | | | | | | | |/ |
|
| | | | | | | | |/ |
|
| | | | | | | |/ |
|
| | | | | | |/ |
|
| | | | | |/ |
|
| | | | |/ |
|
| | | |/ |
|
| | |/ |
|
| |/ |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
This is meant to be used in swatches, to display the events and callbacks generated by a component as part of the swatch. The usage pattern is described in the comments (in both places).
Naturally, this has its own swatch.
|
|
|
A swatch is a live, and ideally editable, example of an element of the service. They serve as:
* Documentation: what is this element, how do you use it, what does it do?
* Demonstration: what does this element look like?
* Manual test scaffolding: when I change this element like _so_, what happens?
Swatches are collectively available under `/.swatch/` on a running instance, and are set up in a separate [group] from the rest of the UI. They do not require setup or login for simplicity's sake and because they don't _do_ anything that requires either of those things.
[group]: https://svelte.dev/docs/kit/advanced-routing#Advanced-layouts-(group)
Swatches are manually curated, for a couple of reasons:
* We lack the technical infrastructure needed to do this based on static analysis; and
* Manual curation lets us include affordances like "recommended values," that would be tricky to express as part of the type or schema for the component.
The tradeoff, however, is that swatches may fall out of step with the components they depic, if not reviewed regularly. I hope that, by making them part of the development process, this risk will be mitigated through regular use.
|
