Closed
Bug 1396449
Opened 7 years ago
Closed 7 years ago
DeCOMtaminate extension principals
Categories
(Core :: Security: CAPS, enhancement)
Core
Security: CAPS
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
FIXED
mozilla57
Tracking | Status | |
---|---|---|
firefox57 | --- | fixed |
People
(Reporter: kmag, Assigned: kmag)
References
(Blocks 1 open bug)
Details
Attachments
(2 files)
I've been meaning to do this since I started on bug 1322235. In that bug, we made some parts of extension security checks much faster, but there's still a lot of needless COM overhead in the code path that CAPS uses to access the extension policy service. At this point, there's a completely devirtualized API that we should be using instead, rather than doing expensive string-based lookups through COM layers every time we need to test something.
Comment hidden (mozreview-request) |
Comment hidden (mozreview-request) |
Comment hidden (mozreview-request) |
Comment hidden (mozreview-request) |
Comment 5•7 years ago
|
||
mozreview-review |
Comment on attachment 8904091 [details] Bug 1396449: Part 1 - Use WebExtensionPolicy objects in extension content principals. https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/175844/#review181312 Makes sense to me. ::: caps/BasePrincipal.cpp:456 (Diff revision 2) > - nsAutoString addonId; > - NS_ENSURE_SUCCESS(GetAddonId(addonId), false); > + auto policy = AddonPolicy(); > + if (policy) { Nit: I'd prefer these two lines (here and above) to be merged... not that important if you prefer it this way though... ::: caps/nsIPrincipal.idl:17 (Diff revision 2) > +namespace extensions { > +class WebExtensionPolicy; > +} What do you need this for here?
Attachment #8904091 -
Flags: review?(gkrizsanits) → review+
Comment 6•7 years ago
|
||
mozreview-review |
Comment on attachment 8904092 [details] Bug 1396449: Part 2 - Use atoms to test WebExtension permissions. https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/175846/#review181320 \o/
Attachment #8904092 -
Flags: review?(gkrizsanits) → review+
Assignee | ||
Comment 7•7 years ago
|
||
mozreview-review-reply |
Comment on attachment 8904091 [details] Bug 1396449: Part 1 - Use WebExtensionPolicy objects in extension content principals. https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/175844/#review181312 > What do you need this for here? Oops. I initially added the native version of AddonPolicy() to the IDL, but that required it to be virtual, which I wanted to avoid. I forgot to remove this afterwards.
Assignee | ||
Comment 8•7 years ago
|
||
https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/c105574f5739c8582a8bfdd12b2cb945bff288d6 Bug 1396449: Part 1 - Use WebExtensionPolicy objects in extension content principals. r=krizsa https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/3923d2a0cf1f5dab3ea467c6956e2d2c7ea2ba43 Bug 1396449: Part 2 - Use atoms to test WebExtension permissions. r=krizsa
Comment 9•7 years ago
|
||
bugherder |
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/c105574f5739 https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/3923d2a0cf1f
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 7 years ago
status-firefox57:
--- → fixed
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → mozilla57
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•