Always no-proxy localhost/127.0.0.1 except if user very explicitly opts out
Categories
(Core :: Networking, enhancement, P2)
Tracking
()
People
(Reporter: Gijs, Assigned: CuveeHsu)
References
Details
(Keywords: sec-want, Whiteboard: [necko-triaged][post-critsmash-triage][adv-main67-])
Attachments
(1 file)
Updated•6 years ago
|
Assignee | ||
Updated•6 years ago
|
Assignee | ||
Comment 5•6 years ago
|
||
work in progress, plan to have a patch next week
Assignee | ||
Comment 6•6 years ago
|
||
Comment 7•6 years ago
|
||
The original bug notes enterprise stuff, so we'll likely want support for an enterprise policy for this new pref too. See bug 1523810 or :mkaply for a recent example.
Assignee | ||
Comment 8•6 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Justin Dolske [:Dolske] from comment #7)
The original bug notes enterprise stuff, so we'll likely want support for an enterprise policy for this new pref too. See bug 1523810 or :mkaply for a recent example.
Got it. Will update the enterprise policy part in the next update.
Thanks!
Updated•6 years ago
|
Assignee | ||
Comment 9•6 years ago
|
||
Hello :mkaply,
cc you for https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D19325#504725
Personally I believe we need the flexibility to let enterprise decide proxy-ing localhost or not. See bug 1503393 Comment 22-24 for a discussion before. What do you think?
Assignee | ||
Comment 10•6 years ago
|
||
Assignee | ||
Comment 11•6 years ago
|
||
Comment 12•6 years ago
|
||
We can easily create a policy for this. How different is how we are fixing this versus how Chrome is fixing it?
Assignee | ||
Updated•6 years ago
|
Reporter | ||
Comment 13•6 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Mike Kaply [:mkaply] from comment #12)
We can easily create a policy for this. How different is how we are fixing this versus how Chrome is fixing it?
https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/da790f920bbc169a6805a4fb83b4c2ab09532d91 looks like the Chromium commit.
From the commit message:
The compatibility risk of this change should be low as proxying through localhost was not universally supported. It is however an idiom used in testing (a number of our own tests had such a dependency). Impacted users can use the "<-loopback>" bypass rule as a workaround.
So it looks like they added special syntax to the list of proxy bypass addresses to say "and by the way, remove local addresses from this list". I don't know how their policy stuff works and if that means we have to make our policy stuff recognize the same syntax to trip the same policy or what. Pinging Mike again to feed back on this.
FWIW, it also seems like they made a similar default-on exception for link-local IP addresses, not just for 127.0.0.1/localhost/::1. I don't know if we need a similar fix. Junior, thoughts?
Assignee | ||
Comment 14•6 years ago
|
||
as Honza said, we might treat other loopback host as follow up. fwiw another open bug for <loopback> syntax
Comment 15•6 years ago
|
||
I don't see anything in their policy code that covers this:
https://www.chromium.org/administrators/policy-list-3
And the original asks (and issues) don't seem enterprise related.
I'd be OK with not doing a policy for now. If folks really need this, they can set the pref. I doubt it needs to go out company wide.
Assignee | ||
Comment 16•6 years ago
|
||
Remove checkin-needed since we’d like to remove enterprise support
Assignee | ||
Comment 17•6 years ago
|
||
Enterprise policy is removed. Let's see if treeherder is happy
https://treeherder.mozilla.org/#/jobs?repo=try&revision=446fe294f5fa809ca237f18065f5fe9dd852559d
Assignee | ||
Updated•6 years ago
|
Comment 18•6 years ago
|
||
Updated•6 years ago
|
Reporter | ||
Comment 19•6 years ago
|
||
Reporter | ||
Comment 20•6 years ago
|
||
Junior, did you want to uplift this to 66 or mark wontfix for 66?
Assignee | ||
Comment 21•6 years ago
|
||
(In reply to :Gijs (he/him) from comment #20)
Junior, did you want to uplift this to 66 or mark wontfix for 66?
To me, it's a wonfix since no big behaviour difference and same esr.
However, I'd like to ask for information from the point of security.
What do you think, :dveditz?
Updated•6 years ago
|
Updated•6 years ago
|
Updated•6 years ago
|
Updated•6 years ago
|
Reporter | ||
Comment 24•6 years ago
•
|
||
There were at least 7 bugs filed about this behaviour (see bug 1535581 and dupes) since it hit release. That's quite a lot.
Junior, should we consider adding some text underneath the box that says something to the effect of "localhost never uses the proxy"?
Assignee | ||
Comment 25•6 years ago
|
||
Yes, it's in my mind. Thanks for raising this. I'll file another bug and take it.
Updated•5 years ago
|
Description
•