Comment on attachment 8467482 [details] [diff] [review] extended nsDocShell with flags to indicate tracking protection status (similar to mixed content blocked/loaded status) Review of attachment 8467482 [details] [diff] [review]: ----------------------------------------------------------------- ::: docshell/base/nsDocShell.cpp @@ +2134,5 @@ > NS_IMETHODIMP > +nsDocShell::GetHasTrackingContentBlocked(bool* aHasTrackingContentBlocked) > +{ > + nsCOMPtr<nsIDocument> doc(GetDocument()); > + *aHasTrackingContentBlocked = doc && doc->GetHasTrackingContentBlocked(); Seems like you could simplify this patch a lot by just using BlockedTrackingNodeCount() > 0.

Comment on attachment 8469370 [details] [diff] [review] extended nsDocShell with flags to indicate tracking protection status (similar to mixed content blocked/loaded status) We need to introduce two flags to reflect the tracking protection status of a document. (blocked tracking elements or loaded tracking elements after the user's decision to white-list the page) This is required so that the security state of the document (expressed by nsSecureBrowserUIImpl) factors in both handling of mixed content and tracking elements.

Comment on attachment 8469370 [details] [diff] [review] extended nsDocShell with flags to indicate tracking protection status (similar to mixed content blocked/loaded status) >+++ b/content/base/public/nsIDocument.h Please update IID of nsIDocument >+++ b/docshell/base/nsIDocShell.idl >@@ -556,16 +556,29 @@ interface nsIDocShell : nsIDocShellTreeI update uuid >+ // Has Tracking Content been Blocked? >+ if (docShell->GetHasTrackingContentBlocked()) >+ *aState |= nsIWebProgressListener::STATE_BLOCKED_TRACKING_CONTENT; >+ >+ if (docShell->GetHasTrackingContentLoaded()) >+ *aState |= nsIWebProgressListener::STATE_LOADED_TRACKING_CONTENT; Ah, this uses the flags

Comment on attachment 8469529 [details] [diff] [review] extended nsDocShell with flags to indicate tracking protection status (similar to mixed content blocked/loaded status) Carrying over r+ from comment 6 https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/497e1d4921a0