html-encode

The URL link below will open a new Google mail window. The problem I have is that Google replaces all the plus (+) sign in the email body with blank space. It looks like it only happens with the + sign. Any suggestions on how to remedy this? ( I am working the ASP.NET web page) https://mail.google.com/mail?view=cm&tf=0&to=someemail@somedomain.com&su=some subject&body=Hi there+Hello there (In the body email, "Hi there+Hello there" will show up as "Hi there Hello there") Darin Dimitrov The + character has a special meaning in a url => it means whitespace. If you want to use the + sign you need

I am of course familiar with the java.net.URLEncoder and java.net.URLDecoder classes. However, I only need HTML-style encoding. (I don't want ' ' replaced with '+' , etc). I am not aware of any JDK built in class that will do just HTML encoding. Is there one? I am aware of other choices (for example, Jakarta Commons Lang 'StringEscapeUtils' , but I don't want to add another external dependency to the project where I need this. I'm hoping that something has been added to a recent JDK (aka 5 or 6) that will do this that I don't know about. Otherwise I have to roll my own. There isn't a JDK built

I have a textfield which displays a string which contains < and >. The code throws an error because of that. How can I allow the usage of those chars in my textfield? Thanks :) Artemiy Problem is that when this gets posted to server, it will not work, doesn't matter what you try. This is the ASP.NET XSS protection, which can be disabled like so: <%@ Page ... ValidateRequest="false" %> Trouble is, you'll have to be very careful validating all the postback yourself. Easier way is to escape all the contents of textbox using javascript just before posting. You can escape it using same HTML

I just ran across a question with an answer suggesting the AntiXss library to avoid cross site scripting. Sounded interesting, reading the msdn blog , it appears to just provide an HtmlEncode() method. But I already use HttpUtility.HtmlEncode(). Why would I want to use AntiXss.HtmlEncode over HttpUtility.HtmlEncode? Indeed, I am not the first to ask this question. And, indeed, Google turns up some answers , mainly A white-list instead of black-list approach A 0.1ms performance improvement Well, that's nice, but what does it mean for me? I don't care so much about the performance of 0.1ms and I

I store encoded HTML in the database. The only way i could display it correctly is : <div class='content'> @MvcHtmlString.Create(HttpUtility.HtmlDecode(Model.Content)); </div> It's ugly. Is there any better way to do this? Try this: <div class='content'> @Html.Raw(HttpUtility.HtmlDecode(Model.Content)) </div> Use Html.Raw() . Phil Haack posted a nice syntax guide at http://haacked.com/archive/2011/01/06/razor-syntax-quick-reference.aspx . <div class='content'> @Html.Raw( Model.Content ) </div> this is pretty simple: HttpUtility.HtmlDecode(Model.Content) Another Solution, you could also return