Closed
Bug 836990
Opened 12 years ago
Closed 12 years ago
Assertions with transform-style: preserve-3d, overflow, position
Categories
(Core :: Layout, defect)
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
FIXED
mozilla21
Tracking | Status | |
---|---|---|
firefox19 | --- | unaffected |
firefox20 | + | fixed |
firefox21 | + | fixed |
firefox-esr17 | --- | unaffected |
b2g18 | --- | unaffected |
People
(Reporter: jruderman, Assigned: roc)
References
Details
(4 keywords, Whiteboard: [fuzzblocker][adv-main20-])
Attachments
(3 files)
283 bytes,
text/html
|
Details | |
20.40 KB,
text/plain
|
Details | |
2.61 KB,
patch
|
bzbarsky
:
review+
bajaj
:
approval-mozilla-aurora+
dveditz
:
sec-approval+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
Similar symptoms to bug 831335. Might be another regression from bug 827577.
###!!! ASSERTION: unexpected child list: 'Error', file ../../../layout/generic/nsBlockFrame.cpp, line 4733
###!!! ASSERTION: How did that happen?: 'aFrameItems.IsEmpty()', file ../../../layout/base/nsCSSFrameConstructor.cpp, line 1309
###!!! ASSERTION: Frames getting lost!: 'NS_SUCCEEDED(rv)', file ../../../layout/base/nsCSSFrameConstructor.cpp, line 1314
###!!! ASSERTION: Dangling child list. Someone forgot to insert it?: '!FirstChild()', file ../../../layout/base/nsCSSFrameConstructor.cpp, line 652
Assertion failure: mPresArenaAllocCount == 0 (Some pres arena objects were not freed), at ../../../layout/base/nsPresShell.cpp:771
Reporter | ||
Comment 1•12 years ago
|
||
Reporter | ||
Updated•12 years ago
|
Attachment #708864 -
Attachment description: stack → stacks
Assignee | ||
Updated•12 years ago
|
Assignee: nobody → matt.woodrow
Comment 2•12 years ago
|
||
> Might be another regression from bug 827577.
Seems very likely.
Blocks: 827577
Comment 3•12 years ago
|
||
Rob, I think you should probably take this, I don't know this code at all.
Assignee: matt.woodrow → roc
Assignee | ||
Comment 4•12 years ago
|
||
Yeah, I don't know why I assigned this to you!
Reporter | ||
Updated•12 years ago
|
Whiteboard: [fuzzblocker]
Assignee | ||
Comment 5•12 years ago
|
||
Attachment #710132 -
Flags: review?(bzbarsky)
Comment 6•12 years ago
|
||
Robert, I don't quite understand this change. What causes the bug in this case?
Flags: needinfo?(roc)
Assignee | ||
Comment 7•12 years ago
|
||
In this testcase the fixed-pos container is the transformed overflow:auto element. The actual container frame is the scrollframe's child (the scrolled frame, an nsBlockFrame). That frame is *not* transformed, so ProcessFrameInsertions fails to put fixed-pos items on its abs-pos list.
Flags: needinfo?(roc)
Comment 8•12 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 710132 [details] [diff] [review]
fix
Ah, I see. r=me
Attachment #710132 -
Flags: review?(bzbarsky) → review+
Assignee | ||
Comment 9•12 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 710132 [details] [diff] [review]
fix
[Security approval request comment]
How easily could an exploit be constructed based on the patch?
Unknown.
Do comments in the patch, the check-in comment, or tests included in the patch paint a bulls-eye on the security problem?
Yes.
Which older supported branches are affected by this flaw?
Only trunk and Aurora are affected.
If not all supported branches, which bug introduced the flaw?
827577
Do you have backports for the affected branches? If not, how different, hard to create, and risky will they be?
This will be easy to put on Aurora.
How likely is this patch to cause regressions; how much testing does it need?
Dunno. It's a simple patch but this bit of the code has been regression-prone lately.
Attachment #710132 -
Flags: sec-approval?
Updated•12 years ago
|
status-b2g18:
--- → unaffected
status-firefox20:
--- → unaffected
status-firefox21:
--- → affected
status-firefox-esr17:
--- → unaffected
tracking-firefox21:
--- → +
Keywords: regression
Updated•12 years ago
|
status-firefox19:
--- → unaffected
tracking-firefox20:
--- → +
Comment 10•12 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 710132 [details] [diff] [review]
fix
sec-approval+
Attachment #710132 -
Flags: sec-approval? → sec-approval+
Comment 11•12 years ago
|
||
Could this be the underlying problem causing the crashes in bug 839263 / bug 837288 ?
Assignee | ||
Comment 12•12 years ago
|
||
https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/608f588cb3e9
(In reply to Mats Palmgren [:mats] from comment #11)
> Could this be the underlying problem causing the crashes in bug 839263 / bug
> 837288 ?
I think so. We'll find out shortly :-).
Assignee | ||
Comment 13•12 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 710132 [details] [diff] [review]
fix
[Approval Request Comment]
Bug caused by (feature/regressing bug #): 827577
User impact if declined: possible security-sensitive crashes
Testing completed (on m-c, etc.): just landed
Risk to taking this patch (and alternatives if risky): relatively low risk for regular browsing
String or UUID changes made by this patch: none
Attachment #710132 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-aurora?
Comment 14•12 years ago
|
||
Target Milestone: --- → mozilla21
Updated•12 years ago
|
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 12 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Updated•12 years ago
|
Attachment #710132 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-aurora? → approval-mozilla-aurora+
Comment 15•12 years ago
|
||
Updated•12 years ago
|
Flags: in-testsuite+
Updated•12 years ago
|
Whiteboard: [fuzzblocker] → [fuzzblocker][adv-main20-]
Updated•12 years ago
|
Group: core-security
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•