Closed Bug 495044 Opened 15 years ago Closed 15 years ago

Combined EV enablement of bug 493709 to 1.9.0.11

Categories

(Core :: Security: PSM, defect)

Product:
Core
Component:
Security: PSM
Version:
1.9.0 Branch
Type:
defect
Priority:
Not set
Severity:
normal

Tracking

()

Status:
RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 493709

People

(Reporter: eddy_nigg, Assigned: KaiE)

References

Details

Bug 493709 enabled EV for a bunch of CAs, we should apply the attachment 378295 [details] [diff] [review] also to 1.9.0.11 once bug 495033 has been checked in.
Flags: wanted1.9.0.x?
Hi is this fine for the next update of Firefox 3.0? the .11?
Today the 3.0.11 has been release but without this, do you know if it will be for .12 ?
Adding someone with more powers to decide...
Blocks: 398944
Depends on: 496446
No longer depends on: 495033
For this to land in any 3.0 release, it would need a patch that applied cleanly (which I suspect the patch in bug 493709 will, with some massaging) and had been properly reviewed. It would also not be appropriate for it to land before bug 496446, since that adds some of the roots that would be enabled here (though afaict, it would not actually break things). Once those things happen, it should be flagged approval1.9.0.12? (or .13, or .14... depending on how quickly the patch is written and reviewed) so that the people managing the 3.0 release will see it. Once approved, it can land on the branch. This process might seem onerous, but we have 300M users - we need to be certain that a patch is safe before pushing it out to all of them. Eddy wrote the patch for Firefox 3.5, perhaps he will write the 3.0 one as well?
Johnath, the patch should apply to both versions cleanly. Initially before creating the patch I checked the source file nsIdentityChecking.cpp of 3.0 and current trunk and they appeared to be the same. I then actually created the patch on a 1.9.0 tree initially. It should be save to go after bug 496446 is applied.
Since bug 485052 is back-ported to 1.9.0.x branch, can this bug also be processed please?
Can you confirm this will be in 3.0.13 or which version it will be?
Do we really this new bug? Why don't we simply request approval for 1.9.0.x for the patch attached to bug 493709? I confirm attachment 378295 [details] [diff] [review] applies cleanly to 1.9.0 branch and have set the approval request flag. But 496446 has been fixed already, so I guess all prerequisites are available. I guess this bug is unnecessary and can be closed as a duplicate of 493709.
Perhaps we should wait with closing until this patch has been applied to 1.9.x.
duping in favor of branch-tracking flags in the other bug
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 15 years ago
Resolution: --- → DUPLICATE
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.