Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

PM-14223: LoadUrl via messaging #12988

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

abergs
Copy link
Member

@abergs abergs commented Jan 20, 2025

  • Use Messaging service to loadUrl

🎟️ Tracking

📔 Objective

📸 Screenshots

⏰ Reminders before review

  • Contributor guidelines followed
  • All formatters and local linters executed and passed
  • Written new unit and / or integration tests where applicable
  • Protected functional changes with optionality (feature flags)
  • Used internationalization (i18n) for all UI strings
  • CI builds passed
  • Communicated to DevOps any deployment requirements
  • Updated any necessary documentation (Confluence, contributing docs) or informed the documentation team

🦮 Reviewer guidelines

  • 👍 (:+1:) or similar for great changes
  • 📝 (:memo:) or ℹ️ (:information_source:) for notes or general info
  • ❓ (:question:) for questions
  • 🤔 (:thinking:) or 💭 (:thought_balloon:) for more open inquiry that's not quite a confirmed issue and could potentially benefit from discussion
  • 🎨 (:art:) for suggestions / improvements
  • ❌ (:x:) or ⚠️ (:warning:) for more significant problems or concerns needing attention
  • 🌱 (:seedling:) or ♻️ (:recycle:) for future improvements or indications of technical debt
  • ⛏ (:pick:) for minor or nitpick changes

Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Jan 20, 2025

Logo
Checkmarx One – Scan Summary & Detailsa5f6268f-c35b-4de2-9845-3a2c7dd1099a

New Issues (13)

Checkmarx found the following issues in this Pull Request

Severity Issue Source File / Package Checkmarx Insight
CRITICAL CVE-2025-0443 Npm-electron-33.2.1 Vulnerable Package
HIGH CVE-2025-0434 Npm-electron-33.2.1 Vulnerable Package
HIGH CVE-2025-0435 Npm-electron-33.2.1 Vulnerable Package
HIGH CVE-2025-0436 Npm-electron-33.2.1 Vulnerable Package
HIGH CVE-2025-0437 Npm-electron-33.2.1 Vulnerable Package
HIGH CVE-2025-0438 Npm-electron-33.2.1 Vulnerable Package
MEDIUM CVE-2025-0439 Npm-electron-33.2.1 Vulnerable Package
MEDIUM CVE-2025-0440 Npm-electron-33.2.1 Vulnerable Package
MEDIUM CVE-2025-0441 Npm-electron-33.2.1 Vulnerable Package
MEDIUM CVE-2025-0442 Npm-electron-33.2.1 Vulnerable Package
MEDIUM CVE-2025-0446 Npm-electron-33.2.1 Vulnerable Package
MEDIUM CVE-2025-0447 Npm-electron-33.2.1 Vulnerable Package
MEDIUM CVE-2025-0448 Npm-electron-33.2.1 Vulnerable Package

@abergs abergs requested a review from coroiu January 21, 2025 08:11
@abergs
Copy link
Member Author

abergs commented Jan 21, 2025

@coroiu What do you think about this approach?

@@ -331,6 +332,10 @@ const routes: Routes = [
children: [{ path: "", component: LoginDecryptionOptionsComponent }],
},
),
{
path: "passkeys",
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

nit: just to be consistent with naming scheme https://contributing.bitwarden.com/architecture/deep-dives/passkeys/naming-convention

Suggested change
path: "passkeys",
path: "fido2",

Comment on lines 38 to +42
async onMessage(message: any) {
switch (message.command) {
case "loadurl":
await this.main.windowMain.loadUrl(message.url, message.modal);
break;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

issue: using messaging increases the size of this already big class, I would instead suggest taking advantage of IPC requests directly. For an example checkout out clipboard.main.ts and platform/preload.ts. Should be a pretty simple refactor :)

@abergs abergs changed the base branch from main to passkey-window-creation January 21, 2025 13:25
@abergs
Copy link
Member Author

abergs commented Jan 24, 2025

Closing in favour of: #13051

@abergs abergs closed this Jan 24, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants