The git-pages webhook security model depends on there being
a 1:1 mapping between site URLs and repositories; being able to
specify multiple of them breaks this model, as anyone could switch
the published site from one to the other if both repositories exist.
Without this, if a cache first sees a compressed version of the request,
it will return that for potentially any future requests, even if they
don't request compression.
When extracting from an archive it is possible the leading directories
are not part of the archive. Add them to the manifest as otherwise the
behaviour of "index.html" varies depending how the archive was created.
This bug would cause POST hooks triggered for large repositories to
silently fail.
We need the update context to have the principal (which is tied to
the HTTP request), but not the cancellation (which is also tied to
the HTTP request and is triggered once the request is done either way).
Before this change Cache-Control header would always be overridden, this
change allows custom Cache-Control, provided Cache-Control is added to
the header allow list.
Like limiting the size of an archive, it is a supplementary check meant
to limit resource consumption prior to the final check done in
`StoreManifest()`.
This is added to aid migration from Codeberg Pages v2. Forgejo allows
both `_` and `-` in usernames, and it is necessary to be able to accept
host names like `user_name.codeberg.page` under a wildcard domain.
(It is not possible to get a TLS certificate for a host name like this,
so only a wildcard certificate will be able to cover it.)
Currently you can specify "Branch: HEAD" or "Branch: refs/tags/v1" and
go-git will resolve it to the relevant ref. Given the HTTP header is
called Branch this is confusing.
Given this is already depending on zstd I don't see a reason not to.
Can be tested with libarchive via: `bsdtar -a --options zip:compression=zstd -cf file.zip files...`
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/git-pages/git-pages/pulls/91
Co-authored-by: David Leadbeater <dgl@dgl.cx>
Co-committed-by: David Leadbeater <dgl@dgl.cx>
Previously, you could issue e.g. a `GET /%2e%2e/%2e%2e` and it would
get interpreted as a parent directory path segment in the handler.
This didn't result in a path traversal vulnerability when passed to
the S3 backend because of a `path.Clean()` call indirectly done by
`makeWebRoot()`, but it's prudent to not take chances.
