Move TelephonyPermissions to TelephonyCommon

Test: built
Bug: 145554073
Change-Id: I3681043a197e6daeb16dcf506d672bdcf1fc8da8
This commit is contained in:
Shuo Qian
2019-12-04 02:06:06 +00:00
parent b11f93129c
commit fde53bb6f1

View File

@@ -156,6 +156,27 @@ public final class TelephonyPermissions {
return false;
}
/**
* Check whether the app with the given pid/uid can read phone state.
*
* <p>This method behaves in one of the following ways:
* <ul>
* <li>return true: if the caller has the READ_PRIVILEGED_PHONE_STATE permission, the
* READ_PHONE_STATE runtime permission, or carrier privileges on the given subId.
* <li>throw SecurityException: if the caller didn't declare any of these permissions, or, for
* apps which support runtime permissions, if the caller does not currently have any of
* these permissions.
* <li>return false: if the caller lacks all of these permissions and doesn't support runtime
* permissions. This implies that the user revoked the ability to read phone state
* manually (via AppOps). In this case we can't throw as it would break app compatibility,
* so we return false to indicate that the calling function should return dummy data.
* </ul>
*
* <p>Note: for simplicity, this method always returns false for callers using legacy
* permissions and who have had READ_PHONE_STATE revoked, even if they are carrier-privileged.
* Such apps should migrate to runtime permissions or stop requiring READ_PHONE_STATE on P+
* devices.
*/
@VisibleForTesting
public static boolean checkReadPhoneState(
Context context, Supplier<ITelephony> telephonySupplier, int subId, int pid, int uid,
@@ -208,6 +229,20 @@ public final class TelephonyPermissions {
callingPackage, callingFeatureId, message);
}
/**
* Check whether the app with the given pid/uid can read phone state, or has carrier
* privileges on any active subscription.
*
* <p>If the app does not have carrier privilege, this method will return {@code false} instead
* of throwing a SecurityException. Therefore, the callers cannot tell the difference
* between M+ apps which declare the runtime permission but do not have it, and pre-M apps
* which declare the static permission but had access revoked via AppOps. Apps in the former
* category expect SecurityExceptions; apps in the latter don't. So this method is suitable for
* use only if the behavior in both scenarios is meant to be identical.
*
* @return {@code true} if the app can read phone state or has carrier privilege;
* {@code false} otherwise.
*/
@VisibleForTesting
public static boolean checkReadPhoneStateOnAnyActiveSub(
Context context, Supplier<ITelephony> telephonySupplier, int pid, int uid,
@@ -453,6 +488,11 @@ public final class TelephonyPermissions {
context, TELEPHONY_SUPPLIER, subId, pid, uid, callingPackage, callingPackageName);
}
/**
* Check whether the app with the given pid/uid can read the call log.
* @return {@code true} if the specified app has the read call log permission and AppOpp granted
* to it, {@code false} otherwise.
*/
@VisibleForTesting
public static boolean checkReadCallLog(
Context context, Supplier<ITelephony> telephonySupplier, int subId, int pid, int uid,
@@ -490,6 +530,12 @@ public final class TelephonyPermissions {
callingPackage, callingFeatureId, message);
}
/**
* Returns whether the caller can read phone numbers.
*
* <p>Besides apps with the ability to read phone state per {@link #checkReadPhoneState}, the
* default SMS app and apps with READ_SMS or READ_PHONE_NUMBERS can also read phone numbers.
*/
@VisibleForTesting
public static boolean checkReadPhoneNumber(
Context context, Supplier<ITelephony> telephonySupplier, int subId, int pid, int uid,
@@ -529,10 +575,10 @@ public final class TelephonyPermissions {
} catch (SecurityException readPhoneNumberSecurityException) {
}
throw new SecurityException(message + ": Neither user " + uid +
" nor current process has " + android.Manifest.permission.READ_PHONE_STATE +
", " + android.Manifest.permission.READ_SMS + ", or " +
android.Manifest.permission.READ_PHONE_NUMBERS);
throw new SecurityException(message + ": Neither user " + uid
+ " nor current process has " + android.Manifest.permission.READ_PHONE_STATE
+ ", " + android.Manifest.permission.READ_SMS + ", or "
+ android.Manifest.permission.READ_PHONE_NUMBERS);
}
/**
@@ -543,8 +589,8 @@ public final class TelephonyPermissions {
*/
public static void enforceCallingOrSelfModifyPermissionOrCarrierPrivilege(
Context context, int subId, String message) {
if (context.checkCallingOrSelfPermission(android.Manifest.permission.MODIFY_PHONE_STATE) ==
PERMISSION_GRANTED) {
if (context.checkCallingOrSelfPermission(android.Manifest.permission.MODIFY_PHONE_STATE)
== PERMISSION_GRANTED) {
return;
}
@@ -586,8 +632,8 @@ public final class TelephonyPermissions {
}
if (DBG) {
Rlog.d(LOG_TAG, "No READ_PRIVILEDED_PHONE_STATE permission, " +
"check carrier privilege next.");
Rlog.d(LOG_TAG, "No READ_PRIVILEDED_PHONE_STATE permission, "
+ "check carrier privilege next.");
}
enforceCallingOrSelfCarrierPrivilege(subId, message);
@@ -612,8 +658,8 @@ public final class TelephonyPermissions {
private static void enforceCarrierPrivilege(
Supplier<ITelephony> telephonySupplier, int subId, int uid, String message) {
if (getCarrierPrivilegeStatus(telephonySupplier, subId, uid) !=
TelephonyManager.CARRIER_PRIVILEGE_STATUS_HAS_ACCESS) {
if (getCarrierPrivilegeStatus(telephonySupplier, subId, uid)
!= TelephonyManager.CARRIER_PRIVILEGE_STATUS_HAS_ACCESS) {
if (DBG) Rlog.e(LOG_TAG, "No Carrier Privilege.");
throw new SecurityException(message);
}