Added support for ~b, ~bq, and ~bs filters in mitmweb.

[dsphper]

Description

This PR implements the ~b, ~bq, and ~bs filters in mitmweb. These filters allow users to search or highlight response body contents, thereby enhancing the usability and functionality of mitmweb.

Previously, a user indicated in issue #3609 that the ~bs (response body) implementation was not yet available in mitmweb. This update addresses that concern and extends the filtering capability to include ~b and ~bq filters as well.

This feature will significantly improve user experience, based on response body is crucial for efficient data analysis.

Looking forward to feedback and suggestions for improvement.

Checklist

• I have updated tests where applicable.
• I have added an entry to the CHANGELOG.

[dsphper]

Hi @mhils,
Could you please take a look and let me know if there are any additional improvements or changes you'd recommend? Any feedback would be greatly appreciated, as I aim to make this feature as useful as possible for the community.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Best regards,

[mhils]

Thanks! This looks good so far, but unfortunately does not support flows as-they-appear. For example, if I specify ~b foo first and only then a flow with foo in the body arrives, it will not be shown until I modify/resubmit the filter.

Of course, implementing live search is significantly harder (we don't want to issue a new request every time a flow arrives). So we'd need to somehow tell the server via the existing WebSocket connection and then have the server-side mark requests as it transmits them. I know this is a major change, but do you see what I am aiming for?

[ddxv]

Thanks! This looks good so far, but unfortunately does not support flows as-they-appear. For example, if I specify ~b foo first and only then a flow with foo in the body arrives, it will not be shown until I modify/resubmit the filter.

Of course, implementing live search is significantly harder (we don't want to issue a new request every time a flow arrives). So we'd need to somehow tell the server via the existing WebSocket connection and then have the server-side mark requests as it transmits them. I know this is a major change, but do you see what I am aiming for?

Perhaps a warning about this type of behavior? It's not the best, but it is somewhat understandable.

[gjrtimmer]

any process on this?