I've been thinking about this problem and it's not clear to me what the correct behavior should be. Rewriting the cookie feels like a dangerous thing to do, especially if the target webpage doesn't process the cookie correctly. cookie values sent from the server should not be altered by the user. In the case of cookies sent by the client that were not sent by the server, it should be ok I guess. though it feels wrong to use cookies that way.
perhaps more information from the user would help in this case. is the purpose of altering the cookies simulating different users and sessions? peter On 7/3/05, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Indeed, but that does not apply to cookies defined by the user. > > Maybe there needs to be a way of distinguishing the two types. > > Perhaps functions/variables could be processed only when the cookies > are extracted from the Cookie Manager table. > > S. > On 7/3/05, Peter Lin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I would think the cookie manager needs to accept the changes sent by > > the server, otherwise it's wrong. > > > > peter > > > > On 7/2/05, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Bug 28715 points out that Cookie Manager does not support functions > > > and variables. > > > > > > I thought this was because of the way the Cookies were constructed and > > > stored, but in fact it turns out that functions/variables are > > > specifically disabled (by defining null recoverRunningVersion() and > > > setRunningVersion() methods). > > > > > > The comment for these methods says "do nothing, the cookie manager has > > > to accept changes". > > > > > > Is it possible to fix this? > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
