Closed
Bug 1465465
Opened 7 years ago
Closed 7 years ago
Block more ports (427, 548, 6697)
Categories
(Core :: Networking, enhancement, P3)
Core
Networking
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
FIXED
mozilla62
| Tracking | Status | |
|---|---|---|
| firefox62 | --- | fixed |
People
(Reporter: annevk, Assigned: baku)
References
(Blocks 1 open bug)
Details
(Whiteboard: [necko-triaged])
Attachments
(2 files)
|
2.29 KB,
patch
|
annevk
:
review+
valentin
:
review+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
|
1.52 KB,
patch
|
annevk
:
review+
valentin
:
review+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
See https://github.com/whatwg/fetch/pull/738 for the change to the Fetch Standard.
Chrome already blocks 6697 and is planning on blocking the other two as well. We can ship 6697 directly, but might want to consider coordinating the others.
https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/pull/11249 updates the tests.
Updated•7 years ago
|
Priority: -- → P3
Whiteboard: [necko-triaged]
| Reporter | ||
Comment 1•7 years ago
|
||
Chrome landed a patch for blocking the other two. I suspect that means we can go ahead as well.
| Assignee | ||
Updated•7 years ago
|
Assignee: nobody → amarchesini
| Assignee | ||
Comment 2•7 years ago
|
||
Just an update of the port names in order to be in sync with the spec.
Attachment #8982144 -
Flags: review?(annevk)
| Assignee | ||
Comment 3•7 years ago
|
||
block the remaining ports
Attachment #8982145 -
Flags: review?(annevk)
| Assignee | ||
Updated•7 years ago
|
Attachment #8982144 -
Flags: review?(ckerschb)
| Assignee | ||
Updated•7 years ago
|
Attachment #8982145 -
Flags: review?(ckerschb)
| Assignee | ||
Updated•7 years ago
|
Attachment #8982145 -
Attachment description: port2.patch → part 2 - disable AFP and IRC+TLS
| Reporter | ||
Updated•7 years ago
|
Attachment #8982144 -
Flags: review?(annevk) → review+
| Reporter | ||
Comment 4•7 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8982145 [details] [diff] [review]
part 2 - disable AFP and IRC+TLS
Just note I'm not an official reviewer so you probably need to wait for Christoph to say r+.
Attachment #8982145 -
Flags: review?(annevk) → review+
Comment 5•7 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8982144 [details] [diff] [review]
part 1 - name updates
I am fine with the changes, but I am not a Necko peer. I would prefer if some necko peer could sign off on that, hence 302 to valentin!
Attachment #8982144 -
Flags: review?(ckerschb) → review?(valentin.gosu)
Updated•7 years ago
|
Attachment #8982145 -
Flags: review?(ckerschb) → review?(valentin.gosu)
Comment 6•7 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8982144 [details] [diff] [review]
part 1 - name updates
Review of attachment 8982144 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
::: netwerk/base/nsIOService.cpp
@@ +164,1 @@
> 0, // This MUST be zero so that we can populating the array
nit: Could you also fix this line? It bugs me :)
Not sure what it was supposed to be... "so we can stop populating the array" ?
Attachment #8982144 -
Flags: review?(valentin.gosu) → review+
Updated•7 years ago
|
Attachment #8982145 -
Flags: review?(valentin.gosu) → review+
Pushed by amarchesini@mozilla.com:
https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/63652c45be83
Update blocked port names, r=annevk, r=valentin
https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/a358755643e9
Block ports 427, 548 and 6697, r=annevk, r=valentin
Comment 8•7 years ago
|
||
| bugherder | ||
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/63652c45be83
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/a358755643e9
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 7 years ago
status-firefox62:
--- → fixed
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → mozilla62
Comment 9•7 years ago
|
||
What's the story with port 6697? That's the port used by TB's chat component. Will that be blocked now?
Flags: needinfo?(valentin.gosu)
Flags: needinfo?(florian)
Flags: needinfo?(clokep)
Comment 10•7 years ago
|
||
Richard, you're a Daily user, is chat still working in today's Daily?
Flags: needinfo?(richard.marti)
| Reporter | ||
Comment 11•7 years ago
|
||
If that uses irc(s) URLs I think it should be okay (we safelist more schemes for those type of URLs). Rationale can be found here: https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=676951.
Comment 12•7 years ago
|
||
Is this only affecting the Fetch API? We use nsIRoutedSocketTransportService in the Thunderbird chat code (ie. https://searchfox.org/comm-central/rev/88224f63cb428c672929097abd8635138d9fc10f/chat/modules/socket.jsm#588-594)
Flags: needinfo?(florian)
| Reporter | ||
Comment 13•7 years ago
|
||
No, it also affects, e.g., <img> (and any other web platform API). I'm not sure if it would restrict a dedicated socket API, however.
Comment 14•7 years ago
|
||
It's only used for HTTP-like channels: https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/search?q=NS_CheckPortSafety&redirect=false
Flags: needinfo?(valentin.gosu)
Comment 15•7 years ago
|
||
I'm using now today Daily and IRC with port 6697 works for me.
Flags: needinfo?(richard.marti)
Updated•7 years ago
|
Flags: needinfo?(clokep)
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•