1689853 - Bookmarklet using window.open triggers popup blocker

Status: VERIFIED FIXED

(Firefox :: Untriaged, defect)

Description

[jscher2000]

User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:85.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/85.0

Steps to reproduce:

Run a bookmarklet that uses window.open(). For example:

javascript:void(window.open(location.href, "_blank"));

Actual results:

Popup blocker prevents the new window from opening, and Firefox presents the yellow bar.

Web Console reports: "Opening multiple popups was blocked due to lack of user activation."

Expected results:

This is a change from Firefox 84; the desired behavior is to recognize user approval via running the bookmarklet.

Mozregression points to "Bug 1679456 - Consume user activation on popup opening and remove popup opening tokens."

Users have reported the issue on SUMO and Reddit:

• https://support.mozilla.org/questions/1323675
• https://www.reddit.com/r/firefox/comments/l8vwho/bookmarklets_not_working_after_recent_update_to_85/

Comment 1

[Emilio Cobos Álvarez (:emilio)]

Attachment: Bug 1689853 - Fake a user interaction when handling LOAD_FLAGS_ALLOW_POPUPS. r=edgar,smaug

I'll simplify all the popup-blocking setup in a follow-up, but this is
the low-risk change.

Need to add a test for this of course. Kinda baffled we did not have
any.

Comment 2

[Emilio Cobos Álvarez (:emilio)]

Attachment: Bug 1689853 - Cleanup browser_multiple_popups.js. r=edgar,smaug

This will make easier to add more tests in the future.

Comment 3

[Pulsebot]

Pushed by [e-mail]:
https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/autoland/rev/16c796643d52
Fake a user interaction when handling LOAD_FLAGS_ALLOW_POPUPS. r=edgar

Comment 4

[Pulsebot]

Pushed by [e-mail]:
https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/autoland/rev/f37f0997d677
Cleanup browser_multiple_popups.js. r=edgar

Comment 5

[Emilio Cobos Álvarez (:emilio)]

Comment on attachment 9200256 [details]
Bug 1689853 - Fake a user interaction when handling LOAD_FLAGS_ALLOW_POPUPS. r=edgar,smaug

Beta/Release Uplift Approval Request

• User impact if declined: comment 0
• Is this code covered by automated tests?: Yes
• Has the fix been verified in Nightly?: No
• Needs manual test from QE?: Yes
• If yes, steps to reproduce: comment 0
• List of other uplifts needed: none
• Risk to taking this patch: Low
• Why is the change risky/not risky? (and alternatives if risky): Special-case loads triggered by the browser UI which already had a flag to also fake a user interaction, in order to make popups work.
• String changes made/needed: none

Comment 6

[Emilio Cobos Álvarez (:emilio)]

Comment on attachment 9200258 [details]
Bug 1689853 - Cleanup browser_multiple_popups.js. r=edgar,smaug

The test-only cleanup shouldn't need to be in beta, probably...

Comment 7

[BugBot [:suhaib / :marco/ :calixte]]

Set release status flags based on info from the regressing bug 1679456

Comment 8

[Dorel Luca [:dluca]]

Backed out 2 changesets (bug 1689853) for Browser-chrome crash in [@ mozilla::(anonymous namespace)::RunWatchdog(void*)]. CLOSED TREE

Log:
https://treeherder.mozilla.org/logviewer?job_id=328440412&repo=autoland&lineNumber=2767

https://treeherder.mozilla.org/logviewer?job_id=328442655&repo=autoland&lineNumber=15925

Push with failures:
https://treeherder.mozilla.org/jobs?repo=autoland&group_state=expanded&revision=16c796643d527e3003bd552586fc2c187c652eb1

Backout:
https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/autoland/rev/8e8261bb094f44136f53df00f35dddb770b42f03

Comment 9

[Emilio Cobos Álvarez (:emilio)]

It seems we're timing out at the end of the test run. Not sure why my test would cause that off-hand.

Comment 10

[Emilio Cobos Álvarez (:emilio)]

Waiting for the load event on the popup window fixed it.

Comment 11

[Pulsebot]

Pushed by [e-mail]:
https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/autoland/rev/1b3b3291fe1b
Fake a user interaction when handling LOAD_FLAGS_ALLOW_POPUPS. r=edgar

Comment 12

[Pulsebot]

Pushed by [e-mail]:
https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/autoland/rev/1f1cf37833df
Cleanup browser_multiple_popups.js. r=edgar

Comment 13

[jscher2000]

While we're at it...

Could we test whether this resolves an issue in the WordPress editor's Preview function (SUMO). It seems to be that window.focus() doesn't work after window.open() with a named window if the window was already open. Test page:

https://www.jeffersonscher.com/res/focusnamedtab.html

• first click, opens second tab and Firefox focuses it
• return to the first tab, click again, the second tabs reloads, but is not focused

Mozregression points to the same: Bug 1679456 - Consume user activation on popup opening and remove popup opening tokens.

Comment 14

[Emilio Cobos Álvarez (:emilio)]

Can you file a new bug for that and ni? me? This won't address it.

Comment 15

[Andreea Pavel [:apavel]]

https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/1b3b3291fe1b
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/1f1cf37833df

Comment 16

[Pascal Chevrel:pascalc (PTO until April 26)]

Comment on attachment 9200256 [details]
Bug 1689853 - Fake a user interaction when handling LOAD_FLAGS_ALLOW_POPUPS. r=edgar,smaug

Approved for 86 beta 5, thanks.

Comment 17

[Julien Cristau [:jcristau] (back April 22)]

https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-beta/rev/fb4d1a0ef359
https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-beta/rev/4886b1657d08

Comment 18

[Anca Soncutean, Desktop QA]

Reproduced with Fx 87.0a1 (2021-01-30) on Windows 10.
Verified fixed with Fx 87.0a1 (2021-02-02) and Fx 86.0b5 (treeherder build) on Windows 10, macOS 10.15 and Ubuntu 18.04.

Comment 19

[Matthew G. Saroff]

So, this should be resolved with the next release?

Comment 20

[Emilio Cobos Álvarez (:emilio)]

Yes.

Comment 21

[Matthew G. Saroff]

(In reply to Emilio Cobos Álvarez (:emilio) from comment #20)

Yes.

On a more organizational than programming note, this appears to pop up on a semi-regular basis. (Every few years)

Is there something missing in the review of new releases that needs to be added?

Comment 22

[Emilio Cobos Álvarez (:emilio)]

Well, we apparently didn't have an automated test for this, so I added one. It should hopefully prevent this from happening again.

Comment 23

[Matthew G. Saroff]

(In reply to Emilio Cobos Álvarez (:emilio) from comment #22)

Well, we apparently didn't have an automated test for this, so I added one. It should hopefully prevent this from happening again.

Thanks.

I'm actually so old school that I was thinking of an aviation style paper checklist.