Closed
Bug 284282
Opened 19 years ago
Closed 19 years ago
Firefox silently downloads iframe src files. Even executable files !!
Categories
(Toolkit :: Downloads API, defect)
Tracking
()
VERIFIED
DUPLICATE
of bug 266325
People
(Reporter: mailinglists, Assigned: bugs)
References
()
Details
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8b2) Gecko/20050227 Firefox/1.0+ Build Identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8b2) Gecko/20050227 Firefox/1.0+ When Firefox finds in a HTML document an iframe tag with a file source automatically downloads it, it does not mind what file type it is, even an executable one. Try this: <iframe height="0" width="0" src="ftp://ftp.rediris.es/mirror/simtelnet/win95/filemngr/tcmdr651.exe"></iframe> Reproducible: Always
Seems not to be a bug, see Bug 266325.
Version: unspecified → Trunk
(In reply to comment #1) > Seems not to be a bug, see Bug 266325. I do not think so. An unsolicited executable (.exe) under windows ia always a risk and such file could be too big for a dialup connection. Anyway about iframe source files, shouldn't them be filterred by filetype ( extension or magic number ) ? shouldn't them be filterred by filesize ( maximun filesize configuration option ) ?
Comment 3•19 years ago
|
||
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 266325 ***
Status: UNCONFIRMED → RESOLVED
Closed: 19 years ago
Resolution: --- → DUPLICATE
Updated•19 years ago
|
Status: RESOLVED → VERIFIED
(In reply to comment #3) > > *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 266325 *** That bug is INVALID, since it describes a diferent, old, behavior I think that this one, 284282, must not be resolved as duplicated.
Severity: normal → blocker
Status: VERIFIED → UNCONFIRMED
Resolution: DUPLICATE → ---
Summary: Firefox automatically downloads iframe src even executable files → Firefox silently downloads iframe src files. Even executable files !!
Comment 5•19 years ago
|
||
This is a dupe, do not reopen this bug a second time. Please read https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/etiquette.html before commenting further. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 266325 ***
Status: UNCONFIRMED → RESOLVED
Closed: 19 years ago → 19 years ago
Resolution: --- → DUPLICATE
(In reply to comment #5) > This is a dupe, do not reopen this bug a second time. Please read > https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/etiquette.html before commenting further. > > *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 266325 *** Maybe, but I don not know if you really noticed the different behavior between old bug, INVALID, and this one and if you have pondered it or you just marked it again as duplicated without paying any attention. I am sorry about bordering but surprisingly I have not had any feedback from you from my feedback, I did, to you. So I would appreciate you to discuss things or at least explaining your reasons and showing me you understand my comments. Please reply this post !!!
Updated•19 years ago
|
Flags: blocking-aviary1.1?
Flags: blocking-aviary1.1-
Flags: blocking-aviary1.0.3?
Flags: blocking-aviary1.0.3-
(In reply to comment #7) > knock, knock !! > > > Thank you for "your acknowledgment" !!! As stated in comment 5, please read the "rules" of conduct: "2 No obligation. "Open Source" is not the same as "the developers must do my bidding." The only person who has any obligation to fix the bugs you want fixed is you. Never act as if you expect someone to fix a bug by a particular date or release. This is merely obnoxious, and is likely to get the bug ignored."
Status: RESOLVED → VERIFIED
(In reply to comment #8) > (In reply to comment #7) > > knock, knock !! > > > > > > Thank you for "your acknowledgment" !!! > > As stated in comment 5, please read the "rules" of conduct: > > "2 No obligation. > "Open Source" is not the same as "the developers must do my bidding." The only > person who has any obligation to fix the bugs you want fixed is you. Never act > as if you expect someone to fix a bug by a particular date or release. This is > merely obnoxious, and is likely to get the bug ignored." > First of all, I just wanted you to show me any kind of manners, instead of ignoring me. I do not want specifically you to do something. However this is, or is not, a bug with out dependence on who is going to solve it, even if no body would like to work on it. Developers must NOT do my bidding. But as a user in this project (developer in other projects) I do not feel my self as an inferior being who should not be pay attention to. We are on the same team, treat me as a person. Anyway, I could not understand how this bug was ignored, comparing it with bug 279945
Comment 10•19 years ago
|
||
You ask for a response on April 1. With a weekend in between, don't start sending reminders already on April 4. That comes across as obnoxious and will be ignored. The same goes for reopening bugs, shouting, and exlamation marks and talking about "inferior beings" and not "being treated as a person". Your blocking request was something altogether differenent and handled by someone else. Furthermore, i assume "you" is used transferrably, as you, Juan, never asked me, Patrick, anything. End of non-bug related discussion.
Reporter | ||
Comment 11•19 years ago
|
||
(In reply to comment #10) > You ask for a response on April 1. With a weekend in between, don't start > sending reminders already on April 4. Mike Connor took a time to change this bug resolution but not for arguing about it, as I asked him 20 minutes later. Frank Wien never replied my post, 2005-09-03, in bug 266325 so I was afraid it is happening again. > That comes across as obnoxious and will be > ignored. The same goes for reopening bugs, shouting, and exlamation marks and > talking about "inferior beings" and not "being treated as a person". > I am very sorry about my unproper manners bat it was the only way to get your attention for a bug I am concerned about. > Your blocking request was something altogether differenent and handled by > someone else. Furthermore, i assume "you" is used transferrably, as you, Juan, > never asked me, Patrick, anything. > "YOU", bugzilla administrators > End of non-bug related discussion. I wanted a bug related discussion but I could not get it. Excuse me if only got you angry instead of talk about this bug.
Comment 12•19 years ago
|
||
for the record, none of the people who touched this bug are bugzilla administrators, and bugzilla administrators have little to do with the everyday management of individual bugs. now, mconnor is a firefox peer, and dveditz is a mozilla.org driver, so they are well within their right to take the actions they took.
Updated•16 years ago
|
Product: Firefox → Toolkit
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•