Fix WebSocket to set first party for cookies

Fix WebSocket to set first party for cookies

BUG=618962
R=mkwst,yhirano

Committed: https://crrev.com/8572d57f3e17612ce57406b6cbc15704b67901e9
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#405057}

[tyoshino (SeeGerritForStatus), 2016-06-28 06:55:09]

Patchset #1 (id:1) has been deleted

[tyoshino (SeeGerritForStatus), 2016-06-28 07:28:04]

Patchset #1 (id:20001) has been deleted

[tyoshino (SeeGerritForStatus), 2016-06-28 07:30:49]

Patchset #1 (id:40001) has been deleted

[tyoshino (SeeGerritForStatus), 2016-06-28 07:32:17]

Description was changed from

==========
Fix WebSocket to set first party for cookies

BUG=618962
==========

to

==========
Fix WebSocket to set first party for cookies

BUG=618962
==========

[tyoshino (SeeGerritForStatus), 2016-06-28 07:32:17]

tyoshino@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ mkwst@chromium.org

[tyoshino (SeeGerritForStatus), 2016-06-28 07:33:53]

mkwst: Please review Blink side code.

[Mike West, 2016-06-28 11:25:37]

Blink code looks pretty good. A few notes inline.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2102993002/diff/60001/net/websockets/websocke...
File net/websockets/websocket_stream.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2102993002/diff/60001/net/websockets/websocke...
net/websockets/websocket_stream.cc:105:
url_request_->set_first_party_for_cookies(first_party_for_cookies);
Could you set the initiator as well? `url_request_->set_initiator(origin);`
should do it.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2102993002/diff/60001/net/websockets/websocke...
net/websockets/websocket_stream.cc:361: socket_url, url_request_context, origin,
GURL("http://example.com/"),
Hard-coded `http://example.com/`? Why not pass it in like you're already doing
with |origin|? That would let you write better unit tests in //net.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2102993002/diff/60001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
File
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/http/tests/security/cookies/websocket/first-party-cookie-not-blocked.html
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2102993002/diff/60001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/http/tests/security/cookies/websocket/first-party-cookie-not-blocked.html:3:
<script src="/js-test-resources/testharnessreport.js"></script>
Nit: Just `/resources/`

https://codereview.chromium.org/2102993002/diff/60001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/http/tests/security/cookies/websocket/first-party-cookie-not-blocked.html:5:
<script src="../../../websocket/resources/cookie-test-util.js"></script>
Nit: I think that just `/websocket` is a little simpler to follow.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2102993002/diff/60001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/http/tests/security/cookies/websocket/first-party-cookie-not-blocked.html:9:
testRunner.setAlwaysAcceptCookies(false);
Nit: Would you mind filing a bug to rename this? It's a really terrible name. :)

https://codereview.chromium.org/2102993002/diff/60001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/http/tests/security/cookies/websocket/first-party-cookie-not-blocked.html:12:
var test = async_test('Test first-party cookie is not blocked for WebSocket');
Style nit: I usually end up writing this as:

```
async_test(t => {

test goes here

}, 'Test first-party cookie is not blocked...');
```

It has the advantage of wrapping the test up in a block, so it's clear where one
starts and stops, and provides a closure around any variables. It also sets the
test object as `this`, so you can drop the `test.` in a few places. Doesn't make
a huge difference for these tests, but I think it ends up being more readable in
general.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2102993002/diff/60001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
File
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/http/tests/security/cookies/websocket/resources/third-party-iframe.html
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2102993002/diff/60001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/http/tests/security/cookies/websocket/resources/third-party-iframe.html:3:
<script src="../../../../websocket/resources/cookie-test-util.js"></script>
Nit: Ditto with the `..` bits.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2102993002/diff/60001/third_party/WebKit/Sour...
File
third_party/WebKit/Source/modules/websockets/DocumentWebSocketChannelTest.cpp
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2102993002/diff/60001/third_party/WebKit/Sour...
third_party/WebKit/Source/modules/websockets/DocumentWebSocketChannelTest.cpp:167:
EXPECT_CALL(*handle(), connect(WebURL(KURL(KURL(), "ws://localhost/")), _, _, _,
handleClient()));
Nit: Why not check the values passed into `connect()` here? Not just the
first-party, but the others as well?

[tyoshino (SeeGerritForStatus), 2016-06-30 08:24:13]

Tests are not yet fixed. Publishing replies for impl comments.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2102993002/diff/60001/net/websockets/websocke...
File net/websockets/websocket_stream.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2102993002/diff/60001/net/websockets/websocke...
net/websockets/websocket_stream.cc:105:
url_request_->set_first_party_for_cookies(first_party_for_cookies);
On 2016/06/28 11:25:37, Mike West (OOO through 4th) wrote:
> Could you set the initiator as well? `url_request_->set_initiator(origin);`
> should do it.

OK. My understanding is that so far even if we set the initiator, it doesn't
make any difference in IncludeForRequestURL() since it's subresource and
therefore origin mismatch in AddCookieHeaderAndStart() also means first party
mismatch. Is it correct?

https://codereview.chromium.org/2102993002/diff/60001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
File
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/http/tests/security/cookies/websocket/first-party-cookie-not-blocked.html
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2102993002/diff/60001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/http/tests/security/cookies/websocket/first-party-cookie-not-blocked.html:3:
<script src="/js-test-resources/testharnessreport.js"></script>
On 2016/06/28 11:25:37, Mike West (OOO through 4th) wrote:
> Nit: Just `/resources/`

Oh. It's no longer preferred? Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2102993002/diff/60001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/http/tests/security/cookies/websocket/first-party-cookie-not-blocked.html:5:
<script src="../../../websocket/resources/cookie-test-util.js"></script>
On 2016/06/28 11:25:37, Mike West (OOO through 4th) wrote:
> Nit: I think that just `/websocket` is a little simpler to follow.

Done. Yeah, I often use relative path so that we can refactor directory, but
this point doesn't make sense for this kind of cross-component reference.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2102993002/diff/60001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/http/tests/security/cookies/websocket/first-party-cookie-not-blocked.html:9:
testRunner.setAlwaysAcceptCookies(false);
On 2016/06/28 11:25:37, Mike West (OOO through 4th) wrote:
> Nit: Would you mind filing a bug to rename this? It's a really terrible name.
:)

Created crbug.com/624711

https://codereview.chromium.org/2102993002/diff/60001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/http/tests/security/cookies/websocket/first-party-cookie-not-blocked.html:12:
var test = async_test('Test first-party cookie is not blocked for WebSocket');
On 2016/06/28 11:25:37, Mike West (OOO through 4th) wrote:
> Style nit: I usually end up writing this as:
> 
> ```
> async_test(t => {
> 
> test goes here
> 
> }, 'Test first-party cookie is not blocked...');
> ```
> 
> It has the advantage of wrapping the test up in a block, so it's clear where
one
> starts and stops, and provides a closure around any variables. It also sets
the
> test object as `this`, so you can drop the `test.` in a few places. Doesn't
make
> a huge difference for these tests, but I think it ends up being more readable
in
> general.

Yeah, sorry. I've been a bit away from layout test writing and forgot to use it.
Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2102993002/diff/60001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
File
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/http/tests/security/cookies/websocket/resources/third-party-iframe.html
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2102993002/diff/60001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/http/tests/security/cookies/websocket/resources/third-party-iframe.html:3:
<script src="../../../../websocket/resources/cookie-test-util.js"></script>
On 2016/06/28 11:25:37, Mike West (OOO through 4th) wrote:
> Nit: Ditto with the `..` bits.

Done.

[tyoshino (SeeGerritForStatus), 2016-06-30 08:28:23]

https://codereview.chromium.org/2102993002/diff/60001/net/websockets/websocke...
File net/websockets/websocket_stream.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2102993002/diff/60001/net/websockets/websocke...
net/websockets/websocket_stream.cc:105:
url_request_->set_first_party_for_cookies(first_party_for_cookies);
On 2016/06/30 08:24:13, tyoshino wrote:
> On 2016/06/28 11:25:37, Mike West (OOO through 4th) wrote:
> > Could you set the initiator as well? `url_request_->set_initiator(origin);`
> > should do it.
> 
> OK. My understanding is that so far even if we set the initiator, it doesn't
> make any difference in IncludeForRequestURL() since it's subresource and
> therefore origin mismatch in AddCookieHeaderAndStart() also means first party
> mismatch. Is it correct?

I noticed that setRequestorOrigin() is not called for all kinds of resource
loading. Maybe that's because it's not necessary for now? For navigation, yes,
it's called by RenderFrameImpl.

[tyoshino (SeeGerritForStatus), 2016-07-04 08:13:42]

https://codereview.chromium.org/2102993002/diff/60001/net/websockets/websocke...
File net/websockets/websocket_stream.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2102993002/diff/60001/net/websockets/websocke...
net/websockets/websocket_stream.cc:361: socket_url, url_request_context, origin,
GURL("http://example.com/"),
On 2016/06/28 11:25:37, Mike West (OOO through 4th) wrote:
> Hard-coded `http://example.com/`? Why not pass it in like you're already doing
> with |origin|? That would let you write better unit tests in //net.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2102993002/diff/60001/third_party/WebKit/Sour...
File
third_party/WebKit/Source/modules/websockets/DocumentWebSocketChannelTest.cpp
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2102993002/diff/60001/third_party/WebKit/Sour...
third_party/WebKit/Source/modules/websockets/DocumentWebSocketChannelTest.cpp:167:
EXPECT_CALL(*handle(), connect(WebURL(KURL(KURL(), "ws://localhost/")), _, _, _,
handleClient()));
On 2016/06/28 11:25:37, Mike West (OOO through 4th) wrote:
> Nit: Why not check the values passed into `connect()` here? Not just the
> first-party, but the others as well?

Done.

[tyoshino (SeeGerritForStatus), 2016-07-04 08:14:06]

I've renamed the layout test files to be more descriptive and clear.

[tyoshino (SeeGerritForStatus), 2016-07-04 08:15:30]

tyoshino@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ yhirano@chromium.org

[tyoshino (SeeGerritForStatus), 2016-07-04 08:17:02]

+yhirano

[Mike West, 2016-07-04 08:23:41]

On 2016/06/30 at 08:28:23, tyoshino wrote:

> > OK. My understanding is that so far even if we set the initiator, it doesn't
> > make any difference in IncludeForRequestURL() since it's subresource and
> > therefore origin mismatch in AddCookieHeaderAndStart() also means first
party
> > mismatch. Is it correct?
> 
> I noticed that setRequestorOrigin() is not called for all kinds of resource
loading. Maybe that's because it's not necessary for now? For navigation, yes,
it's called by RenderFrameImpl.

I have a few patches in flight that will ensure that an initiator is set for all
kinds of resource loads; I think you're correct that we get the right behavior
~accidentally, but I'd like to end up being explicit about things going forward
so I can start adding DCHECKs in various places. :)

Thanks for taking another pass, LGTM!

[tyoshino (SeeGerritForStatus), 2016-07-04 08:52:26]

On 2016/07/04 08:23:41, Mike West wrote:
> On 2016/06/30 at 08:28:23, tyoshino wrote:
> 
> > > OK. My understanding is that so far even if we set the initiator, it
doesn't
> > > make any difference in IncludeForRequestURL() since it's subresource and
> > > therefore origin mismatch in AddCookieHeaderAndStart() also means first
> party
> > > mismatch. Is it correct?
> > 
> > I noticed that setRequestorOrigin() is not called for all kinds of resource
> loading. Maybe that's because it's not necessary for now? For navigation, yes,
> it's called by RenderFrameImpl.
> 
> I have a few patches in flight that will ensure that an initiator is set for
all
> kinds of resource loads; I think you're correct that we get the right behavior
> ~accidentally, but I'd like to end up being explicit about things going
forward
> so I can start adding DCHECKs in various places. :)

Got it.

> Thanks for taking another pass, LGTM!

Thanks!

[yhirano, 2016-07-04 09:48:10]

Can you rebase the patch set?

[tyoshino (SeeGerritForStatus), 2016-07-04 15:02:21]

The CQ bit was checked by tyoshino@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-04 15:02:36]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[tyoshino (SeeGerritForStatus), 2016-07-04 15:03:42]

On 2016/07/04 09:48:10, yhirano wrote:
> Can you rebase the patch set?

Done

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-04 16:30:16]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-04 16:30:17]

Dry run: Try jobs failed on following builders:
  win_chromium_rel_ng on master.tryserver.chromium.win (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.win/builders/win_chromium_rel_...)

[tyoshino (SeeGerritForStatus), 2016-07-05 07:42:02]

The CQ bit was checked by tyoshino@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-05 07:42:10]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[tyoshino (SeeGerritForStatus), 2016-07-05 07:43:48]

Fixed layout test failures.

mkwst: http/tests/websocket/construct-in-detached-frame.html failed due to crash
in Document::firstPartyForCookies(). I've changed it to return "data:;" when the
frame is detached. PTAL.

[Mike West, 2016-07-05 08:45:10]

Changes to Document LGTM % a nit if the bots are happy.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2102993002/diff/180001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/Document.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2102993002/diff/180001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/Document.cpp:4172: }
Nit: No {} for single line bodies.

Would you mind adding a `// TODO(mkwst): This doesn't properly handle HTML
Import documents.` I have another CL floating around somewhere that addresses
this case, but it's not ready to land yet.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-05 09:10:38]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-05 09:10:38]

Dry run: Try jobs failed on following builders:
  win_chromium_rel_ng on master.tryserver.chromium.win (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.win/builders/win_chromium_rel_...)

[tyoshino (SeeGerritForStatus), 2016-07-05 14:41:27]

https://codereview.chromium.org/2102993002/diff/180001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/Document.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2102993002/diff/180001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/dom/Document.cpp:4172: }
On 2016/07/05 08:45:10, Mike West wrote:
> Nit: No {} for single line bodies.
> 

Fixed

> Would you mind adding a `// TODO(mkwst): This doesn't properly handle HTML
> Import documents.` I have another CL floating around somewhere that addresses
> this case, but it's not ready to land yet.

Added to the top of the function

[tyoshino (SeeGerritForStatus), 2016-07-05 14:43:11]

On 2016/07/05 08:45:10, Mike West wrote:
> Changes to Document LGTM % a nit if the bots are happy.

Reverted one bug in get-request-header.js. The bots should turn green.

[tyoshino (SeeGerritForStatus), 2016-07-05 14:43:22]

The CQ bit was checked by tyoshino@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-05 14:43:42]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-05 16:08:53]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-05 16:08:54]

Dry run: This issue passed the CQ dry run.

[tyoshino (SeeGerritForStatus), 2016-07-06 04:37:45]

On 2016/07/05 14:43:11, tyoshino wrote:
> On 2016/07/05 08:45:10, Mike West wrote:
> > Changes to Document LGTM % a nit if the bots are happy.
> 
> Reverted one bug in get-request-header.js. The bots should turn green.

Passed CQ dry run.

[tyoshino (SeeGerritForStatus), 2016-07-06 04:38:12]

Description was changed from

==========
Fix WebSocket to set first party for cookies

BUG=618962
==========

to

==========
Fix WebSocket to set first party for cookies

BUG=618962
R=mkwst,yhirano
==========

[yhirano, 2016-07-06 11:19:08]

can we have tests in net_unittests?

https://codereview.chromium.org/2102993002/diff/220001/third_party/WebKit/Lay...
File
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/http/tests/security/cookies/websocket/first-party-cookie-accepted.html
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2102993002/diff/220001/third_party/WebKit/Lay...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/http/tests/security/cookies/websocket/first-party-cookie-accepted.html:14:
async_test(t => {
[optional] I prefer promise_test to async_test if test is composed of several
promise operations.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2102993002/diff/220001/third_party/WebKit/pub...
File third_party/WebKit/public/platform/modules/websockets/WebSocketHandle.h
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2102993002/diff/220001/third_party/WebKit/pub...
third_party/WebKit/public/platform/modules/websockets/WebSocketHandle.h:60:
virtual void connect(const WebURL&, const WebVector<WebString>& protocols, const
WebSecurityOrigin&, const WebURL&, const WebString& user_agent_override,
WebSocketHandleClient*) = 0;
Please add the name for the second WebURL parameter.

[tyoshino (SeeGerritForStatus), 2016-07-07 07:00:36]

On 2016/07/06 11:19:08, yhirano wrote:
> can we have tests in net_unittests?

WebSocketChannel::SendAddChannelRequestWithSuppliedCreator() is tested.

WebSocketStream is straightforward and needs non-trivial amount of injection for
testing.

[tyoshino (SeeGerritForStatus), 2016-07-07 07:00:45]

https://codereview.chromium.org/2102993002/diff/220001/third_party/WebKit/Lay...
File
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/http/tests/security/cookies/websocket/first-party-cookie-accepted.html
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2102993002/diff/220001/third_party/WebKit/Lay...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/http/tests/security/cookies/websocket/first-party-cookie-accepted.html:14:
async_test(t => {
On 2016/07/06 11:19:08, yhirano wrote:
> [optional] I prefer promise_test to async_test if test is composed of several
> promise operations.

Changed

https://codereview.chromium.org/2102993002/diff/220001/third_party/WebKit/pub...
File third_party/WebKit/public/platform/modules/websockets/WebSocketHandle.h
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2102993002/diff/220001/third_party/WebKit/pub...
third_party/WebKit/public/platform/modules/websockets/WebSocketHandle.h:60:
virtual void connect(const WebURL&, const WebVector<WebString>& protocols, const
WebSecurityOrigin&, const WebURL&, const WebString& user_agent_override,
WebSocketHandleClient*) = 0;
On 2016/07/06 11:19:08, yhirano wrote:
> Please add the name for the second WebURL parameter.

Done.

[yhirano, 2016-07-07 10:40:52]

lgtm

[tyoshino (SeeGerritForStatus), 2016-07-08 08:12:04]

The CQ bit was checked by tyoshino@chromium.org

[tyoshino (SeeGerritForStatus), 2016-07-08 08:12:04]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from mkwst@chromium.org,
yhirano@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/2102993002/#ps300001
(title: "Rebase")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-08 08:13:08]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-08 10:03:35]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-08 10:03:36]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  win_chromium_rel_ng on master.tryserver.chromium.win (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.win/builders/win_chromium_rel_...)

[tyoshino (SeeGerritForStatus), 2016-07-12 07:11:55]

The CQ bit was checked by tyoshino@chromium.org

[tyoshino (SeeGerritForStatus), 2016-07-12 07:11:56]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from mkwst@chromium.org,
yhirano@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/2102993002/#ps340001
(title: "Fixed test expectation for cookie-ws-to-ws.html")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-12 07:12:49]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-12 08:44:54]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-12 08:44:56]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  linux_chromium_rel_ng on master.tryserver.chromium.linux (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/linux_chromium_...)

[tyoshino (SeeGerritForStatus), 2016-07-12 09:04:13]

The CQ bit was checked by tyoshino@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-12 09:04:41]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-12 10:14:19]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-12 10:14:20]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  win_chromium_rel_ng on master.tryserver.chromium.win (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.win/builders/win_chromium_rel_...)

[tyoshino (SeeGerritForStatus), 2016-07-12 10:21:24]

The CQ bit was checked by tyoshino@chromium.org

[tyoshino (SeeGerritForStatus), 2016-07-12 10:21:25]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from mkwst@chromium.org,
yhirano@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/2102993002/#ps360001
(title: "Update testRunner calls to setBlockThirdPartyCookies()")

[tyoshino (SeeGerritForStatus), 2016-07-12 10:21:40]

The CQ bit was checked by tyoshino@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-12 10:21:51]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-12 14:25:54]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-12 14:25:56]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  linux_chromium_asan_rel_ng on master.tryserver.chromium.linux (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/linux_chromium_...)

[tyoshino (SeeGerritForStatus), 2016-07-13 05:04:47]

The CQ bit was checked by tyoshino@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-13 05:05:08]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-13 06:30:03]

Description was changed from

==========
Fix WebSocket to set first party for cookies

BUG=618962
R=mkwst,yhirano
==========

to

==========
Fix WebSocket to set first party for cookies

BUG=618962
R=mkwst,yhirano
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-13 06:30:05]

Committed patchset #16 (id:360001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-13 06:30:09]

CQ bit was unchecked.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-13 06:31:19]

Description was changed from

==========
Fix WebSocket to set first party for cookies

BUG=618962
R=mkwst,yhirano
==========

to

==========
Fix WebSocket to set first party for cookies

BUG=618962
R=mkwst,yhirano

Committed: https://crrev.com/8572d57f3e17612ce57406b6cbc15704b67901e9
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#405057}
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-13 06:31:20]

Patchset 16 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/8572d57f3e17612ce57406b6cbc15704b67901e9
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#405057}