When we implement `KeyboardEvent.key`, its value for Windows Logo key was
declared as `OS`, but now the spec declares it as `Meta`.
When we implement `KeyboardEvent.code`, its value for Windows Logo keys in
Win/Linux and Command keys in macOS are declared as `OSLeft`/`OSRight`, but
now the spec declares them as `MetaLeft`/`MetaRight`.
This patch remaps and renames them.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D183481
When we implement `KeyboardEvent.key`, its value for Windows Logo key was
declared as `OS`, but now the spec declares it as `Meta`.
When we implement `KeyboardEvent.code`, its value for Windows Logo keys in
Win/Linux and Command keys in macOS are declared as `OSLeft`/`OSRight`, but
now the spec declares them as `MetaLeft`/`MetaRight`.
This patch remaps and renames them.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D183481
Firefox 115 is the last version to support macOS versions < 10.15 (bug 1836375). Firefox (like Safari and Chrome) already caps the UA string's macOS version at 10.15 to avoid webcompat breakage from sites not expecting macOS versions >= 11.0 (bug 1679929).
Since the UA string's macOS version will no longer be < 10.15 or > 10.15, we can now hard code the UA string's macOS version as 10.15.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D182585
I had to trial-and-error my way through using BrowserTestUtils
but I think the result is a bit easier to read and understand.
Although the diff is pretty ugly.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D179250
This adds the infrastructure for a simpleFPP test into head.js
Then it adds the test for browser_hwconcurrency_etp_iframes.js
that behaves differently from the simpleRFP test.
And then it adds the simpleFPP test to every hardware concurrency
test just to double check things.
Depends on D179108
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D179249
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
I was able to adapt the simple iframe test to a popup
test with pretty minimal adaptations, so I did that.
Remains to be seen if I can do it for the others.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D178684
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
I was able to adapt the simple iframe test to a popup
test with pretty minimal adaptations, so I did that.
Remains to be seen if I can do it for the others.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D178684
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
I was able to adapt the simple iframe test to a popup
test with pretty minimal adaptations, so I did that.
Remains to be seen if I can do it for the others.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D178684
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
I was able to adapt the simple iframe test to a popup
test with pretty minimal adaptations, so I did that.
Remains to be seen if I can do it for the others.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D178684
