This patch removes the static pointer to nsIIOService in nsContentUtils,
replacing it to calls to mozilla::components::IO::Service.
It also makes nsScriptSecurityManager::sIOService a StaticRefPtr.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D188714
This patch removes the static pointer to nsIIOService in nsContentUtils,
replacing it to calls to mozilla::components::IO::Service.
It also makes nsScriptSecurityManager::sIOService a StaticRefPtr.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D188714
This patch has three parts to it:
1) Use NS_IsContentAccessibleAboutURI to ensure that only safe
about: documents get exempted.
With this change, we will no longer allow about:blank or
about:srcdoc to be exempted base on URI. If they are to be
exempted, it will need to be base on other information.
2) In Document::RecomputeResistFingerprinting we previously
deferred to a Parent Document if we had one, and either the
principals matched or we were a null principal.
We will do the same thing, except we will also defer to our
opener as well as the parent document. Now about:blank
documents can be exempted.
However, this deferral only works if the opener is
same-process. For cross-process openers, we make the decision
ourselves.
We can make the wrong decision though. CookieJarSettings is
inherited through iframes but it is _not_ inherited through popups.
(Yet. There's some discussion there, but it's not implemented.)
Conceptually; however, we do want CJS to inherit, and we do want
RFP to inherit as well. Because a popup can collude with its
opener to bypass RFP and Storage restrictions, we should propagate
the CJS information.
This does lead to an unusual situation: if you have exempted
b.com, and a.com (which is not exempted) creates a popup for b.com
then that popup will not be exempted. But an open tab for b.com
would be. And it might be hard to tell those two apart, or why
they behave differently.
The third part of the patch:
3) In LoadInfo we want to populate information down from the
opener to the popup. This is needed because otherwise a
cross-origin popup will not defer to its opener (because in
Fission they're in different processes) and will decide if
it should be exempted itself. It's the CookieJarSettings
object that prevents the cross-origin document from thinking
it should be exempted - CJS tells it 'No, you're a child
(either a subdocument or a popup) and if I say you don't get
an exemption, you don't.'
Finally, there is one more caveat: we can only defer to a parent
document or opener if it still exists. A popup may outlive its
opener. If that happens, and something induces a call to
RecomputeResistFingerprinting, then (e.g.) an about:blank popup
may lose an RFP exemption that it had received from its parent.
This isn't expected to happen in practice -
RecomputeResistFingerprinting is only called on document creation
and pref changes I believe.
It is not possible for a popup to _gain_ an exemption though,
because even if the parent document is gone, the CJS lives on and
restricts it.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D178866
This patch has three parts to it:
1) Use NS_IsContentAccessibleAboutURI to ensure that only safe
about: documents get exempted.
With this change, we will no longer allow about:blank or
about:srcdoc to be exempted base on URI. If they are to be
exempted, it will need to be base on other information.
2) In Document::RecomputeResistFingerprinting we previously
deferred to a Parent Document if we had one, and either the
principals matched or we were a null principal.
We will do the same thing, except we will also defer to our
opener as well as the parent document. Now about:blank
documents can be exempted.
However, this deferral only works if the opener is
same-process. For cross-process openers, we make the decision
ourselves.
We can make the wrong decision though. CookieJarSettings is
inherited through iframes but it is _not_ inherited through popups.
(Yet. There's some discussion there, but it's not implemented.)
Conceptually; however, we do want CJS to inherit, and we do want
RFP to inherit as well. Because a popup can collude with its
opener to bypass RFP and Storage restrictions, we should propagate
the CJS information.
This does lead to an unusual situation: if you have exempted
b.com, and a.com (which is not exempted) creates a popup for b.com
then that popup will not be exempted. But an open tab for b.com
would be. And it might be hard to tell those two apart, or why
they behave differently.
The third part of the patch:
3) In LoadInfo we want to populate information down from the
opener to the popup. This is needed because otherwise a
cross-origin popup will not defer to its opener (because in
Fission they're in different processes) and will decide if
it should be exempted itself. It's the CookieJarSettings
object that prevents the cross-origin document from thinking
it should be exempted - CJS tells it 'No, you're a child
(either a subdocument or a popup) and if I say you don't get
an exemption, you don't.'
Finally, there is one more caveat: we can only defer to a parent
document or opener if it still exists. A popup may outlive its
opener. If that happens, and something induces a call to
RecomputeResistFingerprinting, then (e.g.) an about:blank popup
may lose an RFP exemption that it had received from its parent.
This isn't expected to happen in practice -
RecomputeResistFingerprinting is only called on document creation
and pref changes I believe.
It is not possible for a popup to _gain_ an exemption though,
because even if the parent document is gone, the CJS lives on and
restricts it.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D178866
This patch has three parts to it:
1) Use NS_IsContentAccessibleAboutURI to ensure that only safe
about: documents get exempted.
With this change, we will no longer allow about:blank or
about:srcdoc to be exempted base on URI. If they are to be
exempted, it will need to be base on other information.
2) In Document::RecomputeResistFingerprinting we previously
deferred to a Parent Document if we had one, and either the
principals matched or we were a null principal.
We will do the same thing, except we will also defer to our
opener as well as the parent document. Now about:blank
documents can be exempted.
However, this deferral only works if the opener is
same-process. For cross-process openers, we make the decision
ourselves.
We can make the wrong decision though. CookieJarSettings is
inherited through iframes but it is _not_ inherited through popups.
(Yet. There's some discussion there, but it's not implemented.)
Conceptually; however, we do want CJS to inherit, and we do want
RFP to inherit as well. Because a popup can collude with its
opener to bypass RFP and Storage restrictions, we should propagate
the CJS information.
This does lead to an unusual situation: if you have exempted
b.com, and a.com (which is not exempted) creates a popup for b.com
then that popup will not be exempted. But an open tab for b.com
would be. And it might be hard to tell those two apart, or why
they behave differently.
The third part of the patch:
3) In LoadInfo we want to populate information down from the
opener to the popup. This is needed because otherwise a
cross-origin popup will not defer to its opener (because in
Fission they're in different processes) and will decide if
it should be exempted itself. It's the CookieJarSettings
object that prevents the cross-origin document from thinking
it should be exempted - CJS tells it 'No, you're a child
(either a subdocument or a popup) and if I say you don't get
an exemption, you don't.'
Finally, there is one more caveat: we can only defer to a parent
document or opener if it still exists. A popup may outlive its
opener. If that happens, and something induces a call to
RecomputeResistFingerprinting, then (e.g.) an about:blank popup
may lose an RFP exemption that it had received from its parent.
This isn't expected to happen in practice -
RecomputeResistFingerprinting is only called on document creation
and pref changes I believe.
It is not possible for a popup to _gain_ an exemption though,
because even if the parent document is gone, the CJS lives on and
restricts it.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D178866
This flag is not supported by most event targets and can have unexpected
side effects (namely spinning a nested event loop). All consumers have
been replaced with a new function which is more explicit about this side
effect.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D173985
Base64 encoding is done to top-level principal and the sub-principals
of expanded principals. Getting rid of the Base64 encoding entirely
also lets us use jsoncpp consider expanded principals to be entirely
serialized as JSON.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D166783
