This is a no-op refactoring.
These functions are deprecated and replaced by
NetworkTemplate#Builder, use public API instead.
Test: make RunSettingsLibRoboTests
Bug: 204830222
Change-Id: Idc2a09d8e3789ca2c7a97691cfad4b2e2b417f0d
In onReceive of AppRestrictionsFragment.java, there is a possible way to
start a phone call without permissions due to a confused deputy.
This could lead to local escalation of privilege with no additional
execution privileges needed.
We should not allow the restrictionsIntent to startActivity simply
because it resolves to multiple activities.
Instead, we should call resolveActivity and check the result's package
name is same as current package name, then it is safe to startActivity.
Bug: 200688991
Test: manual verify
Change-Id: Iaa2d3a9497c3266babe0789961befc9776a4db7a
Merged-In: Iaa2d3a9497c3266babe0789961befc9776a4db7a
(cherry picked from commit 359512cd95)
In onReceive of AppRestrictionsFragment.java, there is a possible way to
start a phone call without permissions due to a confused deputy.
This could lead to local escalation of privilege with no additional
execution privileges needed.
We should not allow the restrictionsIntent to startActivity simply
because it resolves to multiple activities.
Instead, we should call resolveActivity and check the result's package
name is same as current package name, then it is safe to startActivity.
Bug: 200688991
Test: manual verify
Change-Id: Iaa2d3a9497c3266babe0789961befc9776a4db7a
Merged-In: Iaa2d3a9497c3266babe0789961befc9776a4db7a
(cherry picked from commit 359512cd95)
In onReceive of AppRestrictionsFragment.java, there is a possible way to
start a phone call without permissions due to a confused deputy.
This could lead to local escalation of privilege with no additional
execution privileges needed.
We should not allow the restrictionsIntent to startActivity simply
because it resolves to multiple activities.
Instead, we should call resolveActivity and check the result's package
name is same as current package name, then it is safe to startActivity.
Bug: 200688991
Test: manual verify
Change-Id: Iaa2d3a9497c3266babe0789961befc9776a4db7a
Merged-In: Iaa2d3a9497c3266babe0789961befc9776a4db7a
(cherry picked from commit 359512cd95)
In onReceive of AppRestrictionsFragment.java, there is a possible way to
start a phone call without permissions due to a confused deputy.
This could lead to local escalation of privilege with no additional
execution privileges needed.
We should not allow the restrictionsIntent to startActivity simply
because it resolves to multiple activities.
Instead, we should call resolveActivity and check the result's package
name is same as current package name, then it is safe to startActivity.
Bug: 200688991
Test: manual verify
Change-Id: Iaa2d3a9497c3266babe0789961befc9776a4db7a
Merged-In: Iaa2d3a9497c3266babe0789961befc9776a4db7a
(cherry picked from commit 359512cd95)
In onReceive of AppRestrictionsFragment.java, there is a possible way to
start a phone call without permissions due to a confused deputy.
This could lead to local escalation of privilege with no additional
execution privileges needed.
We should not allow the restrictionsIntent to startActivity simply
because it resolves to multiple activities.
Instead, we should call resolveActivity and check the result's package
name is same as current package name, then it is safe to startActivity.
Bug: 200688991
Test: manual verify
Change-Id: Iaa2d3a9497c3266babe0789961befc9776a4db7a
Merged-In: Iaa2d3a9497c3266babe0789961befc9776a4db7a
(cherry picked from commit 359512cd95)
In onReceive of AppRestrictionsFragment.java, there is a possible way to
start a phone call without permissions due to a confused deputy.
This could lead to local escalation of privilege with no additional
execution privileges needed.
We should not allow the restrictionsIntent to startActivity simply
because it resolves to multiple activities.
Instead, we should call resolveActivity and check the result's package
name is same as current package name, then it is safe to startActivity.
Bug: 200688991
Test: manual verify
Change-Id: Iaa2d3a9497c3266babe0789961befc9776a4db7a
Merged-In: Iaa2d3a9497c3266babe0789961befc9776a4db7a
(cherry picked from commit 359512cd95)
* Only the Settings app can reset credentials
via com.android.credentials.RESET.
* com.android.credentials.INSTALL should still be
callable by CertInstaller.
Manual testing steps:
* Install certificate via Settings
* Verify unable to reset certificates via test app
provided in the bug (app-debug.apk)
* Verify able to reset certificates via Settings
* Verify com.android.credentials.INSTALL isn't changed
Bug: 200164168
Test: manual
Change-Id: I9dfde586616d004befbee529f2ae842d22795065
(cherry picked from commit 4c1272a921)
Merged-In: I9dfde586616d004befbee529f2ae842d22795065
- If WiFi configuration is not allowed, the WiFi QR code intent is
ignored.
- Add SafetyNet Logging to b/202017876.
Bug: 202017876
Test: manual test
make RunSettingsRoboTests ROBOTEST_FILTER=WifiDppEnrolleeActivityTest
Change-Id: I147d2f4f4fabe2e24d5d3eaaad701b81059e8eee
button style.
The operation of the Switch is not suitable for previewing the
screen saver and will make the user confused. So we change the
style of the screen saver widget back to the button style.
Fix: 189505023
Test: manually test the screen saver
Change-Id: I4a97d91cc0b76111d4cb7b6aa202f2207ee0ca5d
PIN error message when user operating on PIN lock got long text string.
Which not fit into 2 lines of display area.
This is a change to expand the display area to max. capacity but remain
tightly wrap the text.
Bug: 211176734
Test: local
Change-Id: If175a53de4646d2479b15b10f6b59e4e0870d521
