Bug 1851889 Comment 34 Edit History

Note: The actual edited comment in the bug view page will always show the original commenter’s name and original timestamp.

The issue could affect all sandbox client/server communication after XPCOM shutdown, but the only visible impact we have seen is with the prespawn CIG mitigation. This mitigation only impacts Nightly users (and actually a very small portion of them, see bug 1872995). Because the fix is on a critical path of the sandbox code, it seems more reasonable not to uplift this.
The issue could affect all sandbox client/server communication after XPCOM shutdown, but the only visible impact we have seen is with the prespawn CIG mitigation. This mitigation only impacts Nightly users (and actually a very small portion of them, see bug 1872995). Moreover the fix is on a critical path of the sandbox code. It seems more reasonable not to uplift this.
The issue could affect all sandbox client/server communication after XPCOM shutdown, but the only visible impact we have seen is with the prespawn CIG mitigation. This mitigation is only active for Nightly users (and actually a very small portion of them, see bug 1872995). Moreover the fix is on a critical path of the sandbox code. It seems more reasonable not to uplift this.
The issue could affect all sandbox client/server communication after XPCOM shutdown (see comment 29), but the only visible impact we have seen is with the prespawn CIG mitigation. This mitigation is only active for Nightly users (and actually a very small portion of them, see bug 1872995). Moreover the fix is on a critical path of the sandbox code. It seems more reasonable not to uplift this.
The issue could affect all sandbox client/server communication after XPCOM shutdown (see the bolded part of comment 29), but the only visible impact we have seen is with the prespawn CIG mitigation. This mitigation is only active for Nightly users (and actually a very small portion of them, see bug 1872995). Moreover the fix is on a critical path of the sandbox code. It seems more reasonable not to uplift this.

Back to Bug 1851889 Comment 34