Issue 6701 - Implement CSP support in python-abp

tests/test_parser.py

Index: tests/test_parser.py
===================================================================
--- a/tests/test_parser.py
+++ b/tests/test_parser.py
@@ -67,6 +67,47 @@
             (OPT.SITEKEY, ['foo', 'bar']),
         ],
     },
+    "||foo.com^$csp=script-src 'self' * 'unsafe-inline'": {
+        'selector': {'type': ST.URL_PATTERN, 'value': '||foo.com^'},
+        'action': FA.BLOCK,
+        'options': [
+            (OPT.CSP, "script-src 'self' * 'unsafe-inline'"),
+        ],
+    },
+    'bla$match-case,csp=first csp,script,other,domain=foo.com,sitekey=foo': {

[Vasily Kuznetsov, 2018/06/08 16:41:48]

It seems like this test does more or less the sane as the previous one. That one
has a more tricky CSP option, this one has other options -- maybe we could
combine them into one test.

[rhowell, 2018/06/12 21:13:18]

Done.

+        'selector': {'type': ST.URL_PATTERN, 'value': 'bla'},
+        'action': FA.BLOCK,
+        'options': [
+            ('match-case', True),
+            ('csp', 'first csp'),
+            ('script', True),
+            ('other', True),
+            ('domain', [('foo.com', True)]),
+            ('sitekey', ['foo']),
+        ],
+    },
+    'bla$~match-case,~csp=csp,~script,~other,~third-party,domain=~bar.com': {
+        'selector': {'type': ST.URL_PATTERN, 'value': 'bla'},
+        'action': FA.BLOCK,
+        'options': [
+            ('match-case', False),
+            ('csp=csp', False),

[Vasily Kuznetsov, 2018/06/08 16:41:48]

Hm, I think this should be ('csp', False). I guess the simple swapping trick in
`parser.py` is not sufficient and we'll need to be a bit more clever about this.

[rhowell, 2018/06/12 21:13:18]

Done.

+            ('script', False),
+            ('other', False),
+            ('third-party', False),
+            ('domain', [('bar.com', False)]),
+        ],
+    },
+    '@@bla$script,other,domain=foo.com|~bar.foo.com,csp=c s p': {

[Vasily Kuznetsov, 2018/06/08 16:41:48]

This one adds testing, of a CSP option in an exception rule. I guess it's useful
too, but perhaps it could be combined with the test of line 77 or the test of
line 101. All in all, 2 tests for csp=xxx and one for ~csp should probably be
enough.

[rhowell, 2018/06/12 21:13:18]

I already combined the first two csp tests, so now we have one test for csp
block, one for csp allow, and one for ~csp. Good enough? Or, I could combine the
two csp tests, but then it would only test the exception.

+        'selector': {'type': ST.URL_PATTERN, 'value': 'bla'},
+        'action': FA.ALLOW,
+        'options': [
+            ('script', True),
+            ('other', True),
+            ('domain', [('foo.com', True), ('bar.foo.com', False)]),
+            ('csp', 'c s p'),
+        ],
+    },
     # Element hiding filters and exceptions.
     '##ddd': {
         'selector': {'type': ST.CSS, 'value': 'ddd'},