Confirmed users
1,982
edits
Security/Sandbox/Deny Filesystem Access: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Security/Sandbox/Deny Filesystem Access (view source)
Revision as of 15:36, 1 August 2016
, 1 August 2016adding notes on extensions
(removing 'blocker' sections, just using a general list) |
(adding notes on extensions) |
||
| Line 86: | Line 86: | ||
* Jed commented that this could be used to fix Blob URL issues in the content process. | * Jed commented that this could be used to fix Blob URL issues in the content process. | ||
|} | |} | ||
= Extension Notes = | |||
* Traditional XUL and sdk extensions will never run in a separate process (bug 1136407) | |||
* Legacy extensions do a majority of their file access in the parent | |||
* Frame scripts are currently loaded by the content process directly | |||
* Extension write access? | |||
** Accessing areas like $PROFILE/chrome/userContent.css | |||
** This should always be accomplished through the parent process | |||
** Q Are there extensions that try to do this from content? | |||
** Q: Other areas content process frame scripts might try to write to files? | |||
** Extension directories that get created in the root profile directory: | |||
*** $PROFILE/extension-data/* (uMatrix) | |||
*** $PROFILE/adblockplus/* | |||
*** … | |||
= Plugin File Access = | = Plugin File Access = | ||