New issue
Advanced search Search tips

Issue 756984 link

Starred by 1 user
Status: WontFix
Owner:
tsepez@chromium.org
Closed: Sep 2017
Cc:
rsesek@chromium.org
wfh@chromium.org
tsepez@chromium.org
dcheng@chromium.org
palmer@chromium.org
Components:
EstimatedDays: ----
NextAction: ----
OS: All
Pri: 2
Type: Bug



Sign in to add a comment

Add security ownership to 3 files where mojo service provider sandbox levels are currently hard-coded.

Project Member Reported by penny...@chromium.org, Aug 18 2017 
OS: All

Contained within ServiceManager in browser, currently in three files total:

1) service_manager_context.cc (https://cs.chromium.org/chromium/src/content/browser/service_manager/service_manager_context.cc?q=service_manager_context.cc&sq=package:chromium&l=351)

and ContentBrowserClient implementations:

2) chrome_content_browser_client.cc (https://cs.chromium.org/chromium/src/chrome/browser/chrome_content_browser_client.cc?q=chrome_content_browser_client.cc&sq=package:chromium&l=3005)

3) shell_content_browser_client.cc (https://cs.chromium.org/chromium/src/content/shell/browser/shell_content_browser_client.cc?q=shell_content_browser_client.cc&sq=package:chromium&l=241)


They seem to be contained in the context of "registering out of process services".

Until the sandbox types are pulled out of these code files and into manifests (or any other form of config), we should ensure security oversight of these sandbox levels.

Comment 1 by rsesek@chromium.org, Aug 18 2017 

I don't know if we want to put SECURITY_OWNERS on all of chrome_content_browser_client.cc, because it's a large file that probably does change pretty frequently. We could move the ChromeContentBrowserClient::RegisterOutOfProcessServices method (and maybe some of the other security-critical Mojo methods) into chrome_content_browser_client_mojo.cc and just enforce ownership over that?

Comment 2 by penny...@chromium.org, Sep 12 2017

Cc: tsepez@chromium.org
Hey Tom,

Could you just comment on whether your current sandbox cleanup CLs will remove the hard-coded sbox_types out of these three files (and into manifests)?

Will this ticket become obsolete?  And if so, perhaps we assign this to you, or just block it on your current work?

P

Comment 3 by penny...@chromium.org, Sep 18 2017

Owner: tsepez@chromium.org
Status: Assigned (was: Available)

Comment 4 by tsepez@chromium.org, Sep 19 2017

Status: WontFix (was: Assigned)
This should now be handled by manifests. 

The question becomes, do we have security owners on manifest.json files?

Comment 5 by rsesek@chromium.org, Sep 19 2017 

Yes, adding SECURITY_OWNERS to manifests was done in  issue 695922 .
►

Sign in to add a comment