Remove Nightly restriction for blocking threads with LoadLibrary* functions as entry points
Categories
(Core :: DLL Services, enhancement, P4)
Tracking
()
People
(Reporter: ccorcoran, Assigned: toshi)
References
Details
Attachments
(2 files)
|
48 bytes,
text/x-phabricator-request
|
pascalc
:
approval-mozilla-beta-
|
Details | Review |
|
48 bytes,
text/x-phabricator-request
|
pascalc
:
approval-mozilla-beta+
|
Details | Review |
| Assignee | ||
Updated•4 years ago
|
| Assignee | ||
Comment 1•3 years ago
|
||
Bug 1435816 enabeld this protection in Nightly four years ago. It's time to
expand it to the other release channels.
Bug 1752466 showed WebRoot uses this technique and caused a deadlock in Firefox.
It proved this protection is helpful.
Updated•3 years ago
|
Comment 3•3 years ago
|
||
| bugherder | ||
| Assignee | ||
Comment 4•3 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 9262134 [details]
Bug 1481454 - Enable protection against the CreateRemoteThread+LoadLibrary technique in non-Nightly. r=mhowell
Beta/Release Uplift Approval Request
- User impact if declined: Webroot Secureanywhere may cause deadlock at startup.
- Is this code covered by automated tests?: No
- Has the fix been verified in Nightly?: Yes
- Needs manual test from QE?: No
- If yes, steps to reproduce:
- List of other uplifts needed: None
- Risk to taking this patch: Medium
- Why is the change risky/not risky? (and alternatives if risky): The change is to remove
NIGHTLY_BUILDrestriction, so landing this on Nightly had no impact. We have run this nightly-only code for four years (since bug 1435816) and no regression was reported. I set the risk to Medium because this change might impact valid third-party applications that are mainly installed with Beta or Release version. Without uplifting this, however, we cannot evaluate such impact. - String changes made/needed: None
Comment 5•3 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 9262134 [details]
Bug 1481454 - Enable protection against the CreateRemoteThread+LoadLibrary technique in non-Nightly. r=mhowell
This landed in 98 nightly which goes into beta tomorrow, so no need to uplift to beta.
Comment 6•3 years ago
|
||
Toshi, this patch had never been on beta before, I think it would be good to keep it behind the early_beta_or_earlier flag.
| Assignee | ||
Comment 7•3 years ago
|
||
Ok, let's reopen this. I'll upload a patch to add EARLY_BETA_OR_EARLIER.
| Assignee | ||
Comment 8•3 years ago
|
||
This protection may be too risky to be enabled unconditionally.
Comment 9•3 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Toshihito Kikuchi [:toshi] from comment #7)
Ok, let's reopen this. I'll upload a patch to add
EARLY_BETA_OR_EARLIER.
Thanks, please request an uplift to beta once this has landed.
Comment 10•3 years ago
|
||
Comment 11•3 years ago
|
||
| bugherder | ||
| Assignee | ||
Comment 12•3 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 9263110 [details]
Bug 1481454 - Restrict the LoadLibrary injection protection to early beta. r=mhowell
Beta/Release Uplift Approval Request
- User impact if declined: The earlier patch, preventing the LoadLibrary injection, may cause compat issues, so it's risky to enable it unconditionally. This patch limits it to early beta and earlier.
- Is this code covered by automated tests?: No
- Has the fix been verified in Nightly?: Yes
- Needs manual test from QE?: No
- If yes, steps to reproduce:
- List of other uplifts needed: None
- Risk to taking this patch: Low
- Why is the change risky/not risky? (and alternatives if risky): We used to have the
NIGHTLY_BUILDcheck. This patch replaces it withEARLY_BETA_OR_EARLIER. - String changes made/needed: None
Comment 13•3 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 9263110 [details]
Bug 1481454 - Restrict the LoadLibrary injection protection to early beta. r=mhowell
Approved for 98 beta 3, thanks!
Updated•3 years ago
|
Comment 14•3 years ago
|
||
| bugherder uplift | ||
Comment 15•3 years ago
|
||
Do we have a bug on file for letting this ride the trains eventually?
| Assignee | ||
Comment 16•3 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Ryan VanderMeulen [:RyanVM] from comment #15)
Do we have a bug on file for letting this ride the trains eventually?
Filed a new one. Thank you for the reminder!
Description
•