[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: [tor-bugs] #26233 [Applications/Tor Browser]: Rebase Tor Browser patches for FF61

#26233: Rebase Tor Browser patches for FF61
----------------------------------------------+----------------------------
 Reporter:  sysrqb                            |          Owner:  sysrqb
     Type:  enhancement                       |         Status:
                                              |  needs_revision
 Priority:  Very High                         |      Milestone:
Component:  Applications/Tor Browser          |        Version:
 Severity:  Normal                            |     Resolution:
 Keywords:  TorBrowserTeam201806, tbb-mobile  |  Actual Points:
Parent ID:  #25741                            |         Points:
 Reviewer:                                    |        Sponsor:
----------------------------------------------+----------------------------
Changes (by gk):

 * status:  needs_review => needs_revision
 * keywords:  TorBrowserTeam201806R, tbb-mobile => TorBrowserTeam201806,
     tbb-mobile


Comment:

 Okay, here comes the review. I think MAR files and the signing machinery
 we have won't play a role for Android (see: #26242 for our update
 strategy), thus we can ignore all the signing related patches, I agree.
 I've been a bit more agressive when reviewing your changes. Here is all I
 got:

 c7036c883efebaf0ee6d27285e7a5f9d0abe8eb8 -- good (4bdb543b0ae7)
 2078afc6814a8f0303d9a83c050c068bda704ce3 -- not okay (0e8dbb37c450)
 {{{
 > +// Disable window.Components shim (substitue for
 https://bugs.torproject.org/2874)
 > +pref("dom.use_components_shim", false);
 }}}
 "substitue" and could you mention the Mozilla bug number (1448048)? What's
 the relation to https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/1401260?

 f2c4006d0958a61d671ad7ab8e4c097115ece39c -- okay (1cbd34d3b0b8)
 dfca44dbb3011918f1860ff10ddf7fa825b33713 -- okay (837f8e888cf5)
 4df8383599da34d038e47980ce6005f6355d6a43 -- okay (fe1e6ce7f8d8)
 5e9c8426b5d485ecc02c85cbb98d11305310ef79 -- okay (58a737f021b2)

 F e0cb606a47ac Bug 2874: Block Components.interfaces from content <- I was
 confused by that because there is no bug 2874 related patch anymore. So,
 better "O" I guess.

 5de7b7cdcf120b1fcf29f51d2ce2659d317ec445 -- okay (dfd201a96767)
 9abd24dae812b2f3fc2918b2fb22285f9c3b1392 -- okay (ccebcbb95267)
 8657933084abd6cb6745239698b8d24e11d69dc1 -- okay (87cb0833ffdd)
 ef0eee9cb5aa10e338c1979ff51d7fa6b90f6b0b -- okay (10ac5a7be31f)
 c96db008adde9b8f692786ce5dab817eca961507 -- okay (b6d8bf568ba6)
 ec4d2f41b75d3be3c239421fc6e6905d65efe8e7 -- okay (1dc1a4f7fedc)
 a8e5b7264ecf03e4d554d7a5cfead42159144d0d -- not okay (93a8e5d1b523)

 I think that can go as the patch got upstreamed in bug 967812 (it seems I
 overlooked that by the review for ESR60). Or do we want to keep the test
 because the upstreamed patch does not contain tests? In that case I am
 fine with keeping it for now but we should get the test on the uplift
 radar in this case (why is it marked as `tbb-no-uplift`?).

 174ce1dc9a00c7af8fd1019cc30e24903fada4d7 -- okay (6b35333f3a3a)
 1a683a1d1d0079dafa15a4a3957da24182ea1f44 -- okay (c5b57b1bf1df)
 36d44849da69cf008023519cb4bcede18e96c99c -- okay (16a1bcef4e15)
 6da338503b55259c63160c5e24536ff1e77b5184 -- okay (006dffb468ee)
 1b35f4478c904b0990a45d4a5f191fcc62f4b9ba -- okay (6734d99f40b0)
 6300c93066d07ea3fa54c31852c1564992383877 -- okay (48b1c08e1fff)
 184d59cff2b987c608d9746badd7a007f00423b8 -- okay (5823d75f953a)
 c4331c511caf1a2feaa95e6f6bfcbcd3393907b8 -- okay (cc9862c27fd5)
 f3140e62aaa16e05e9202d6dd4e656886bb285fd -- okay (40752ee655eb)
 e09d2897b4d67e3f65212269e6b774047bfe75fe -- okay (27fa6ab6fa2b)
 f1e3011eb042f516c24de3734b42a1e71d8744c1 -- not okay (612aefdabd9b)

 It seems we don't need that test anymore given that the patch is basically
 obsolete (i.e. the fingerprinting defense got "upstreamed").

 cee52946e9d5b16bb0c42d69e6896d7334995f58 -- okay (4da1d08fb2e2)
 ead92b734879ab153db67da293ac9cb6add8a186 -- okay (17367581443f)
 acef0857f3f6aeac13f4e94eb98f8b55d28e1127 -- okay (71a812c584aa)
 79289c71dc16e3064e1ceb17fb1900e0d08273d8 -- not okay (4e0aed04f7f7)

 Where are the changes in nsToolkitProfileService.cpp etc. coming from? I
 fail to find them on m-c. It seems to me we don't want to differe more
 than needed from Mozilla here.

 f4c2dd434d4bb4aa5cbe4937c6f4e5f85eef74f9 -- okay (716067b4c679)
 3f7ac7eb4d1fc0e66b3105fa105c639aea134733 -- not okay (b95e30974e71)

 not needed for android as it is an updater patch

 a5a2ed6a11b3b1042e02f568f61f8de45a715f49 -- not okay (75d638dddd7d)

 not needed for android as it is an updater patch

 999fe945d5c6f7cbc53c5546a11a4284fb2da71d -- okay (cab08be85615)
 ca4a654280c0a04e89a4dc8b926c540cfb9fb554 -- okay (a4ac08e62457)

 6dad47dd282fe46e888c56e3067869bf99cec47f -- not okay (9a3bb35800d5)

 not needed for android as it is an updater patch

 1478cf4bf40f50144ef053d0e27d5e39946c11ba -- not okay (39f10aaa10ef)

 not needed for android as it is an updater patch

 026597a98e8a75442bc59978d7f2b43bc98c0e2d -- okay (7ca562c26856)
 013a9bd751a57e3b2d28adebe4c742b2300624a8 -- not okay (e984b8c54c75)

 not needed for android as it is an updater patch

 c42570e07aaae5883cea1c05ff685b78e3c4de33 -- okay (3549c5324dda)
 d5acddaef9c2884a3216febefa77389eb12d4c7e -- not okay (c67a0c07fd5b)

 {{{
 +    // Make sure Torbutton, TorLauncher, EFF's HTTPS-Everywhere and meek
      if (XPIDatabase.mustSign(addon.type) &&
 }}}
 One comment line got lost during the rebase.

 85226bc17e8ffc79bed66ea0e4464b4ff0c2c83e -- okay (d29c1ddb254d)
 1493d82415ad5df36fdd9c77810e49438a821e03 -- okay (d010f98a92fe)
 86846e65504ddb2f85ca9df1f547e8742d6b14f5 -- okay (32da0487944c)
 660b6baf00bd4ff2a5ddf4f63d9dc15df070e62d -- okay (2aa950923c66)
 90bff70c9ce677b27c2324359bd5217b07893613 -- okay (fe68460a72cd)
 82763bdd1d1f04237a6655ed3b201922dab7ddcd -- okay (d18befdee332)
 90fc7286242189f3e52aefe7b29809de1609130c -- okay (962babebfc5e)
 1b6e98a4c8d6669cbe6974dc854687358f7f5043 -- okay (c5544f727e46)
 34cf9e7affd2f28b89e3b51f97c7ae8fcbfac67a -- okay (5e0170a7ca05)
 d47a03f002293d4e3521e0e873f0a5848db0d3a2 -- okay (53f7ab7d844a)
 346aa2832c7f53b77e6bdb54adfca0de1d21125e -- okay (3206814bc291)
 db2c0629cc760f0479827f594f7a5f0b3ca2ee5d -- okay (550d0bae6d40)
 4ee877d89d24f4daa28ecf250fe218d6cbd83d9a -- okay (ed1a45a69d15)
 fd88a6380aa544e114330a8cfc0524b7ebb40587 -- okay (58e4a739a6ed)
 0e25749a125ef5858f6d745d09cd2e4a4267ed9c -- okay (3a6cb718e815)
 7b68864ca39ad1ba2ea082312b66cac09024681d -- okay (b589ec74c427)
 e4e28039ecab5bdc57c1c6d0db0d808cab6dd5cf -- not okay (b135c59f65db)

 not needed for android as it is an updater patch

 Two things we should think about while preparing the new branch:

 1) How would the naming scheme for our mobile branches look like?
 Currently we have "tor-browser-
 $ESR_VERSION-$TORBROWSER_MAJOR_VERSION-$BRANCH_NUMBER" which points to the
 second question:

 2) What version number for Tor Browser for Android do we start with?
 Especially given that we are tracking Mozilla release and not esr anymore?
 Should we start over with 1.0?

--
Ticket URL: <https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/26233#comment:6>
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki <https://trac.torproject.org/>
The Tor Project: anonymity online

_______________________________________________
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs