[rfc][icedtea-web] Fix support for signed applets with sandbox permissions in manifest

[Jiri Vanek]

On 06/19/2014 04:11 PM, Andrew Azores wrote:
> On 06/18/2014 01:44 PM, Andrew Azores wrote:
>> On 06/18/2014 12:01 PM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
>>> On 05/27/2014 06:23 PM, Andrew Azores wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> This patch allows signed applets with sandbox permissions specified in
>>>> their manifests to actually
>>>
>>>
>>> How it is dealing with mixed (signed + unsigned code) apps?
>>
>> I don't have any examples of mixed signing apps with a Permissions manifest attribute, but a
>> reproducer could be prepared for this case.
>>
>
> Quick progress update: I'm working with Lukasz on creating this reproducer, since it's a good
> example of a fairly complicated reproducer test. Once that's ready then it can go into a changeset
> along with the already provided test. This will cover fully signed and partially signed applets,
> both with Permissions: sandbox in the manifest.
>
> Which other possible combinations of Signing x Manifest x Plugin/JNLP are worthy of testing? Plugin
> vs JNLP does have a distinction in the Permissions attribute spec, so that should probably be
> tested. Signing of course needs to be done, but fully vs partially is probably sufficient, since
> unsigned applets are only allowed to be sandboxed anyway. Do we also want to have tests for
> Permissions: all-permission in the manifest? And the case of no manifest permissions attribute at
> all is pretty well covered already by a lot of other reproducers (eg MixedSigningApplet and
> CustomPoliciesTest) IMO.
>

There can be nitpicks like jnlp app diverged to be lunched as applet/app and also html applet which 
can be lunched via jnlp href.

It is another x 3 :(
> So {Fully Signed, Partially Signed} x {Permissions: sandbox, Permissions: all-permission} X {Plugin,
> JNLP} ?

Well this is really a lot of work. On one side I would be happy to have them all, on second, I would 
call it to much work (but may be good practice for Lukas ;) ).

Please dont forget to closing listeners otherwise the testsuite will run another 10minutes longer;)

Well all 12 reproducers  (+ 6*4 for applets)is ideal world. If you will have them all it really will 
be nice, but do not waste more time then is necessary.

Ty!


J.


hmm Jsut crossed my mind - Most of the reproducers have no manifest at all. (So issiing permissions 
attribute). The "daily" report  runs with the manifest check off. And on low security. I'm guessing 
it will not be affected by your chnageser (I'm pretty sure, but confirming)


J.