nginx/csp/frontend: block non-https images #1531
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Users can include images in various bits of markdown around odk-central-frontend. This change blocks non-HTTPS images from being loaded in those markdown snippets. From https://github.com/getodk/central/pull/1526/files#r2587770849
3 tasks
alxndrsn
requested review from
lognaturel and
matthew-white
and removed request for
matthew-white
lognaturel
approved these changes
Dec 4, 2025
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Users can include images in various bits of markdown around odk-central-frontend. This change blocks non-HTTPS images from being loaded in those markdown snippets.
From https://github.com/getodk/central/pull/1526/files#r2587770849
What has been done to verify that this works as intended?
Updated tests per #1526
Why is this the best possible solution? Were any other approaches considered?
Could have been kept as part of #1526, but separated to make history and intent clearer.
How does this change affect users? Describe intentional changes to behavior and behavior that could have accidentally been affected by code changes. In other words, what are the regression risks?
Both seem low-impact, and low-risk.
Does this change require updates to documentation? If so, please file an issue here and include the link below.
No.
Before submitting this PR, please make sure you have:
nextbranch OR only changed documentation/infrastructure (masteris stable and used in production)