19:00:09 #startmeeting tor browser 19:00:09 Meeting started Mon Jan 22 19:00:09 2018 UTC. The chair is GeKo. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 19:00:09 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. 19:00:13 (i think they also mean TB team) 19:00:13 hi all! 19:00:15 oops 19:00:20 hi! 19:00:30 * tjr waves 19:00:32 o/ 19:00:41 hello 19:00:47 hi 19:01:11 okay, let's get started 19:01:26 if you have not filled out the pad, please do now 19:01:32 it is https://storm.torproject.org/shared/tHoN4Ii7rLSjPE0OP4gydX4cMGadsXmRQNc-6lwru0N 19:01:52 oh the pad!~ 19:01:54 all other folks please read meanwhile the updates and mark things bold you want to tlak about 19:03:20 sysrqb, about the prefs, are you talking about the extension prefs the default preferences in the extension? (I am asking, because I was struggling with the same thing) 19:05:30 igt0: browser prefs, specifically overriding mobile.js 19:06:22 Orfox directly modifies mobile.js, I think we should use something like the desktop, where we have 000-tor-broserw.js 19:06:33 err, 000-tor-browser.js 19:06:52 alright 19:07:11 let's go down the marked items 19:07:21 tjr: you have the mic 19:07:22 I have a patch and (somehow) it works, but one pref is not overridden :/ 19:07:45 sysrqb: Is it possible to use 000-tor-browser.js as the baseline with extra prefs on top in another file as needed? 19:07:55 I was wondering how the way we do the pref files interacts with code in Firefox that looks to see if there is a user-defined value for a pref 19:08:17 And if Tor Browser-set prefs should be considred 'user defined' or not! 19:08:27 (I don't know the answer to either) 19:08:43 arthuredelstein: already do. I have a #inlcude and then override the rest 19:08:54 sysrqb: cool! 19:09:26 tjr: do you want to talk a bit about your item? 19:09:27 yeah, seemed like the simplest and least error prone 19:09:32 or should we just jump in? 19:09:52 If you meane the pref stuff I was just musing out loud, don't have anything more to say on it 19:10:05 If you mean the stuff I bolded under my name; then... 19:10:14 yes that one 19:10:22 tjr: to answer your question 19:10:23 and based on my reading of the code over the last day 19:10:25 Mostly I'm just putting out a call for some way to tell me what you all think is important to get into 60 19:10:26 (the bolded stuff) 19:10:31 it reads it as a 'pref' 19:10:37 And if I haven't mentioned it yet to make sure it's on my radar 19:10:56 (nt sticky or user) 19:11:01 *not 19:11:07 So I've been looking at that and I set a couple of bugs to P1, in addition to the existing P1 bugs we had for fingerprinting 19:11:17 Here's the list I have right now: https://mzl.la/2E1eVn2 19:11:26 tjr: your list looks good to me 19:11:47 arthuredelstein: how does that map to our patches we have in tor-browser? 19:11:54 arthuredelstein: Yea, I just saw that, thanks for that 19:12:29 Most of them have direct mappings; I think a couple are fixups to existing uplifted patches 19:12:32 The font one seems like a very tough one to close out. Do you know the latest status on that? I never followed it very closely. 19:12:58 I think it's pretty close, and Tim was waiting for he kinto server to be ready 19:13:05 There are some fixups that need to be done 19:13:13 date one is easy, update channel is easy. The Web UUID one is tough.... but that one I don't think is ours to work on? 19:13:22 arthuredelstein: the fix for #23044? 19:13:44 window.name is trying to land tor's patch from scratch right? We haven't rebased or had it reviewd yet? 19:13:49 jkt asked me about that this morning actually 19:14:26 GeKo: Yeah, actually I wanted to ask you about that because I'm not sure which parts we should try to uplift 19:14:35 1330890 is a blocker for a diff one and needs no work IIRC 19:14:37 or the onr for #21321 19:14:41 1330882 I'm not sure of the status of.... 19:14:52 (i mean to contribute the missing part to that one) 19:15:12 tjr: I would propose making a FPI patch for window.name 19:15:27 Ah okay... 19:16:11 arthuredelstein: especially the fix for #19273 19:16:25 is pretty important 19:16:34 what is up with that one? 19:17:21 #19273 = https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1305177 19:18:25 I didn't put it as P1 (this list) but we can do that. Basically I was trying to gauge what's doable in the next 6 weeks or so 19:18:54 If we want it for 60 I think we should put it as P1 and re-evaluate in 3-4 weeks if it's not going to land 19:19:12 And assign it to either me or you depending on who you think is going to do it :) 19:19:20 OK! 19:19:27 yes, please 19:19:31 tjr: regarding https://gitweb.torproject.org/tor-browser.git/patch/?id=ba9e5d6 it is from https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/24197#comment:1 and I think it is already in mozilla-central 19:19:40 There's a couple people in webextensions (not McKay, but others) who have been very helpful so they may be able to help us with the webext thing mentioned 19:19:49 arthuredelstein: and pospeselr could be helping you as well 19:20:00 so, we should be able to get quite some patches upstreamed 19:20:05 boklm: great, thanks 19:20:08 aye aye 19:20:14 OK! I can add quite a few to this P1 list. 19:20:27 thanks. 19:23:07 arthuredelstein: there is #21569 as well 19:23:24 so there seems patches we have missing on your list 19:23:35 There are many missing; these are only P1 19:23:52 who decided that? 19:24:19 the idea was to have a list of all patches and then decide in this meeting which we want and which we did not want to prioritize 19:25:04 Sorry -- I thought you had asked me to triage them. 19:25:30 I think (hope) that anything we may care about is somewhere in this list: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=sw%3A%5Btor%20OR%20fingerprinting&list_id=13978086 19:25:34 oh, sorry for that misunderstanding. 19:25:46 But we can still do that in this meeting. I will paste the list I have. 19:25:52 no, i thought we should have a list based on our patches in tor-browser.git 19:26:07 Right, please give me a couple minutes to get it in a readable state 19:26:09 and then deciding which out of those we want to get upstreamed 19:26:16 no worries 19:26:36 mcs: hi! 19:27:05 i've uploaded the signed mar files to the builds dir on people.tpo 19:27:14 (i am almost done with the signing) 19:27:24 could you test those like today and check whether they work 19:27:25 ? 19:27:33 in particular on macOS? 19:27:46 for the alpha we are using the backup signing key after rotation 19:28:02 GeKo: Yes., some testing is a good idea :) 19:28:15 so, while i tested that myself on linux having someone else doing the testing would be good 19:28:23 7.5-build3 and 8.0a1-build3 are the dirs 19:28:49 thanks 19:28:56 let me know if there are any issues. 19:29:00 Will do. 19:29:06 or better the tor-qa list 19:29:09 cool 19:30:23 igt0: i am curious 19:30:39 did you check whether the desktop browser still worked after moving torbutton? 19:31:01 i guess that's the first stage of arthur's three stage proposal 19:31:29 isabela: yeah, meeting some time next week for the circiot display thing is fine with me 19:31:35 arthuredelstein: ^ 19:31:48 you know 19:31:57 if we have to do it this wed is also good? 19:32:12 i might be scheduling for a day antonela is flying :( sorry 19:32:16 could be! 19:32:27 ok i will confirm via email :) 19:32:33 thanks 19:33:10 yep, it is working. However after moving the default preferences didn't work, so I updated the moz.build and added it in the package-manifest.in. 19:33:27 neat. 19:33:47 fwiw. i am fine if we try to move this in the next alpha 19:34:00 so, if there is a patch to review, let us know :) 19:34:24 sysrqb: interesting bugs you find :) 19:34:33 do we have a ticket on trac for the pref things? 19:34:48 isabela: GeKo: I can do this Wed or next week 19:34:48 GeKo: not yet. I'll open 19:35:01 ah great, I will send it. 19:35:03 if not could you create one, so that the knowledge about it and what we plan to do to fix those is not lost? 19:35:09 sysrqb: ^ 19:35:12 ah, okay, thanks 19:35:20 arthuredelstein: ack 19:35:22 but yes, ...interesting 19:35:30 and scary 19:35:45 yes 19:36:12 alright, discussion time i guess 19:36:34 could someone explain the first point? 19:36:51 arthuredelstein: do you want to keep that meeting ( 19:36:55 at a different time) 19:37:01 which meeting? 19:37:11 Arthur and I would meet with Ethan's team Wens nights 19:37:30 tjr: Yeah, I think that would be useful. Would be great if we can find a time pospeselr can attend as well 19:37:30 i see 19:37:48 Yea, most times between 10 and 5 Central time will work for me, with a few exceptions 19:38:06 when is the meeting scheduled? 19:38:11 Yup, me too, but Pacific time. 19:38:42 Tuesday at this meeting's time? 19:39:21 Yeah, that would work for me. 19:39:40 ok, i can't do anything from Wednesday on (unless it's in the evening pacific) as I have jury duty 19:39:53 so tuesday should work 19:40:25 Cool, done, we'll save the time and figure out the arrangements 5-10 min before this time tomorrow 19:40:32 pospeselr: It's a weekly meeting just in case that wasn't clear 19:40:49 tjr: Sounds good 19:41:06 ah ok 19:41:11 will add to my calendar 19:41:51 thanks 19:41:52 So here's my full list of patches that haven't already been uplifted and could conceivable be uplifted: https://gist.github.com/arthuredelstein/c06d33cbd306fc1d7671c433378eee01 19:42:05 so, the GSOC thing 19:42:55 (For my P1s, I had tried to pick a few that seemed doable before Firefox 60 beta, but we can definitely add more) 19:42:58 tjr: so, you think we should have a crashreporter project 2? 19:43:15 what's the scope of that one? 19:43:18 GeKo: Yea, I think with more effort we could finish it up and get it in a shippable state 19:43:30 ok. fine with me. 19:43:43 Fix the proxying of the submission, get it building reproducibly on win/mac, and tweak/re-review the data we're submitting 19:44:00 yeah, great 19:44:21 do we have any other ideas for GSoC? and folks willing to mentor? 19:45:31 I was thinking it would be nice to have something that removes EXIF data from uploaded images 19:45:47 Maybe that's a GSoC-worthy project? 19:45:57 arthuredelstein: now that is an awesome idea 19:46:14 That is cool, yea 19:47:23 yeah, +1 19:47:25 I think I'd be willing to mentor it but I'm not really familiar with how mentoring GSoC works. 19:48:15 Although maybe it's especially a good thing to do on mobile 19:49:08 Where I probably wouldn't be useful as a mentor 19:49:08 arthuredelstein: i guess a good start could b asking colin 19:49:14 about deadlines etc. 19:49:22 and then take it from there 19:49:37 OK! 19:49:58 arthuredelstein: yeah. usually GSOC require two menotrs, main and backup 19:50:22 I cn help you with that on th emobile siade 19:50:33 ugh, lag. 19:50:39 Thanks, that would be great. I'll email colin and cc you. 19:50:45 sgtm! 19:50:55 arthuredelstein: so, what does "?", "C", and "F" mean? on your updated patch list? 19:51:59 so, just skimming the list 19:52:12 i think we want the fix for #23016 19:52:51 for uplift? 19:52:57 yes 19:53:01 pospeselr: Right, would be great if you want to work on that 19:53:27 the fix for #5282 can get ignored as the whole pipelining code is gone 19:53:27 looked into that already 19:53:32 doesn't need uplift, as the 'broken' component no longer exists 19:53:47 great. 19:54:01 GeKo: Those are codes related to my rebasing work and not relevant 19:54:57 pospeselr: So I guess 23016 won't need to be in the ESR60-based version of TBB, right? 19:56:06 right 19:56:15 ok, so then going over the list takes longer 19:57:05 but it seems to me starting with the usual things like uplifting our newly made fingerprinting and linkability patches is fair game 19:57:08 and important 19:57:21 plus the patch(es) for fixing #19273 19:57:35 that bug caused quite some pain for mcs/brade 19:58:24 i guess that could be a good start to work on things, as time is running short 19:58:47 does that make sense? 19:59:32 I think so. What should we do about triaging this list? 20:00:15 Basically the Tor uplift team was focused on trying to get parity with TBB fingerprinting defenses 20:00:34 So that was where the RFP bugs in that P1 list came from 20:01:20 I think that's actually quite a good goal to have for ESR60, and then as you say, we can try to add more linkability/fingerprinting bugs. 20:01:32 okay. but https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1303456 ? 20:02:46 Yeah, I already added that to the list 20:03:29 arthuredelstein: I think the followup fix for #19273 (along with some background) can be found in #22618 20:04:22 arthuredelstein: yeah, but that bugs is likely the reason for weird crashes we sometimes have 20:04:42 so, i actually pondering backing it out instead 20:05:18 *i am 20:05:30 GeKo: oh, I had missed that 20:05:45 now I see #19910 20:05:56 yep 20:06:35 so, i think if i should not be at that triage meeting which is perfectly fine to me 20:06:40 OK, I'll remove that from our uplift batch for now 20:06:56 then a way forward would be to just start working on fingerprnting and linkability bugs 20:07:08 and have #19273 on the radar 20:07:22 and we determine the order and set of patches in the meeting next week 20:07:47 (the ones we should prioritize in the remaining time) 20:08:03 does that make sense? 20:08:44 meanwhile, do we have anything else for today? 20:09:09 You want to do triage in the tbb-dev meeting next week? 20:09:42 well, i think we should work as fast as possible on upstreaming patches 20:09:43 Or should we triage in the meeting tomorrow with tjr and pospeselr? 20:10:03 you can do the triage tomorrow that's fine 20:10:13 but we should look over the final result next monday 20:10:38 OK, sounds good. I agree on making upstreaming a high priority now as well 20:10:51 okay! we made it it seems 20:10:58 sorry for the long meeting 20:11:12 thanks all *baf* 20:11:15 #endmeeting