Re: [w3c/ServiceWorker] Service worker client URL discrepancy (#1515)

fbuecklers left a comment (w3c/ServiceWorker#1515)

Hi, 

I have initially opened the Issue in the soft-navigarion initiative. However this seems to be the right place. 

We are using the client.url to decide for any sub resources of a given page if we want to fetch and cache specific sub resources of a page or want to bypass the service worker logic entirely. There exists many security tools like fraud protection/bot detection etc. which do not handle the presence of a service worker properly. 

A current URL can help here a lot to detect if a user is entering auch a area with a soft navigation where the service worker should bypass any fetch handling. 

Also the scope of a service worker can't protect us in this case, since it also doesn't get updated properly. 


-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/ServiceWorker/issues/1515#issuecomment-4572540122
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3c/ServiceWorker/issues/1515/4572540122@github.com>