there is no option to override port

RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 85601

Status

()

Firefox
Security
RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 85601
2 years ago
2 years ago

People

(Reporter: illumilor.e, Unassigned)

Tracking

42 Branch
Points:
---

Firefox Tracking Flags

(Not tracked)

Details

(URL)

(Reporter)

Description

2 years ago
User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:42.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/42.0
Build ID: 2015103000

Steps to reproduce:


When using firefox to navigate to port 79, there is no override option given to the user

Comment 1

2 years ago
Hi reporter, 
unfortunately this report is not very useful because it does not describe the problem well. If you have time and can still reproduce the problem, please read https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/QA/Bug_writing_guidelines and add a more useful description to this report.
Flags: needinfo?(illumilor.e)
(Reporter)

Comment 2

2 years ago
What info do you need?
Flags: needinfo?(illumilor.e)

Comment 3

2 years ago
See https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/QA/Bug_writing_guidelines as pointed out many many times to you already.
Unfortunately you seem to continue ignoring those bug writing guidelines hence your reports often become a time sink for anybody else looking at them, which is rather disrespectful towards other members of the Mozilla community.
Flags: needinfo?(illumilor.e)
(Reporter)

Comment 4

2 years ago
I have followed all the guidelines.What info do you need?
Flags: needinfo?(illumilor.e)

Comment 5

2 years ago
Please provide precise steps to reproduce the problem (testcase) that allow anybody else to run into the very same problem. Also provide expected results and actual results. These are three different sections.
Flags: needinfo?(illumilor.e)
(Reporter)

Comment 6

2 years ago
1. Go to some url that has a blocked port such as 79.
Expected results: an option to override the "you can't access this port" error be given
actual results: no option is give.

I gave all this information in the bug description.
Flags: needinfo?(illumilor.e)

Updated

2 years ago
Status: UNCONFIRMED → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 2 years ago
Component: Untriaged → Security
Resolution: --- → DUPLICATE
Duplicate of bug: 85601

Comment 8

2 years ago
(In reply to illumilor.e from comment #6)
> 1. Go to some url that has a blocked port such as 79.
> Expected results: an option to override the "you can't access this port"
> error be given
> actual results: no option is give.
> 
> I gave all this information in the bug description.

No you did not. You only dropped some short sentence without any steps to reproduce, and even your last comment here is still not sufficient because you do not provide a clear testcase and only write "some url". Without being specific, noone will try to guess what your steps to reproduce are.
(Reporter)

Comment 9

2 years ago
"and even your last comment here is still not sufficient because you do not provide a clear testcase and only write "some url"."

The exact url is http://192.168.0.1:79/
Status: RESOLVED → UNCONFIRMED
Resolution: DUPLICATE → ---

Comment 10

2 years ago
(In reply to illumilor.e from comment #9)
> "and even your last comment here is still not sufficient because you do not
> provide a clear testcase and only write "some url"."
> 
> The exact url is http://192.168.0.1:79/

Why you think this is not a dupe?
Flags: needinfo?(illumilor.e)

Comment 11

2 years ago
illuminor.e: Do not change the status or resolution of a bug report. You can *propose* a status or resolution change *in a comment*.
Status: UNCONFIRMED → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 2 years ago2 years ago
Resolution: --- → DUPLICATE
Duplicate of bug: 85601
(Reporter)

Comment 12

2 years ago
I was providing the information that was asked.
Flags: needinfo?(illumilor.e)

Updated

2 years ago
Duplicate of this bug: 1238418
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.