Firefox3.6/Plugin Update Awareness Security Review: Difference between revisions

Line 82: Line 82:
== Review comments ==
== Review comments ==


[http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2009/10/13/mozilla-plugin-check-now-live/ concern] that some plugin installers include foistware.
* [http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2009/10/13/mozilla-plugin-check-now-live/ concern] that some plugin installers include foistware.
 
* how many lists of plugins/versions do we have, between PFS and the plugincheck website and the blocklist?
how many lists of plugins/versions do we have, between PFS and the plugincheck website and the blocklist?
*do we show the infobar for both "just outdated" and "outdated and has security holes"?
 
** We're constrained to "outdated", "softblock", and "hard block" :(  So it's hard to block and let users know there's a newer version available.
do we show the infobar for both "just outdated" and "outdated and has security holes"?
*is there a pref for "automatically disable outdated plugins" for our more paranoid users?
* We're constrained to "outdated", "softblock", and "hard block" :(  So it's hard to block and let users know there's a newer version available.
** There's a threshold pref, extensions.blocklist.level.  Setting it to 0 should make "outdated" plugins get disabled.
 
*is the blocklist transferred to users in a way that's authenticated, or it is vulnerable to MITM?
is there a pref for "automatically disable outdated plugins" for our more paranoid users?
** The default plugins.update.url is on https://www.mozilla.com/, but who knows what Ubuntu's is
* There's a threshold pref, extensions.blocklist.level.  Setting it to 0 should make "outdated" plugins get disabled.
*since the warning is an infobar, can users tell the difference between our feature (sending them to adobe.com) and a malicious advertisement (sending them elsewhere)?
 
** Clicking "there is a newer, safer version available" actually takes you to mozilla.com plugincheck page, which as of 3.6, has access to full version number information.
is the blocklist transferred to users in a way that's authenticated, or it is vulnerable to MITM?
* The default plugins.update.url is on https://www.mozilla.com/, but who knows what Ubuntu's is
 
since the warning is an infobar, can users tell the difference between our feature (sending them to adobe.com) and a malicious advertisement (sending them elsewhere)?
* Clicking "there is a newer, safer version available" actually takes you to mozilla.com plugincheck page, which as of 3.6, has access to full version number information.
Confirmed users
729

edits