--- /root/PatchLeaks-main/products/firefox_downloads/FIREFOX_RELEASE_97_END/firefox-FIREFOX_RELEASE_97_END/browser/extensions/webcompat/data/shims.js+++ /root/PatchLeaks-main/products/firefox_downloads/FIREFOX_RELEASE_98_END/firefox-FIREFOX_RELEASE_98_END/browser/extensions/webcompat/data/shims.js@@ -585,6 +585,20 @@     ],     onlyIfDFPIActive: true,   },+  {+    id: "Crave.ca",+    platform: "all",+    name: "Crave.ca",+    bug: "1746439",+    contentScripts: [+      {+        js: "crave-ca.js",+        matches: ["*://account.bellmedia.ca/login*"],+        runAt: "document_start",+      },+    ],+    onlyIfDFPIActive: true,+  }, ]; module.exports = AVAILABLE_SHIMS;

Based on the provided diff, I don't see any security fixes - it appears to be adding a new shim for Crave.ca. However, I'll analyze it following the requested format:

Vulnerability Existed: no
[No security vulnerability found] [browser/extensions/webcompat/data/shims.js] [Lines 585-599]
[Old Code - no previous entry for Crave.ca]
[Fixed Code - adds new shim configuration for Crave.ca]

Additional notes:
1. This appears to be a functional addition rather than a security fix
2. The change adds support for a new website (Crave.ca) with a content script
3. No insecure patterns or vulnerabilities are being fixed in this diff
4. The change follows the existing pattern for shim configurations in the file

If an attacker could control the contents of an iframe sandboxed with <code>allow-popups</code> but not <code>allow-scripts</code>, they were able to craft a link that, when clicked, would lead to JavaScript execution in violation of the sandbox. This vulnerability affects Firefox < 98, Firefox ESR < 91.7, and Thunderbird < 91.7.

--- /root/PatchLeaks-main/products/firefox_downloads/FIREFOX_RELEASE_97_END/firefox-FIREFOX_RELEASE_97_END/testing/web-platform/tests/css/css-shapes/shape-outside/supported-shapes/circle/shape-outside-circle-044.html+++ /root/PatchLeaks-main/products/firefox_downloads/FIREFOX_RELEASE_98_END/firefox-FIREFOX_RELEASE_98_END/testing/web-platform/tests/css/css-shapes/shape-outside/supported-shapes/circle/shape-outside-circle-044.html@@ -9,7 +9,6 @@   <link rel="author" title="Mozilla" href="http://www.mozilla.org/">   <link rel="help" href="https://drafts.csswg.org/css-shapes-1/#supported-basic-shapes">   <link rel="match" href="reference/shape-outside-circle-042-ref.html">-  <meta name="flags" content="">   <meta name="assert" content="Test the boxes are wrapping around the right float shape defined by the basic shape circle(farthest-side at center) value.">   <style>   .container {

Analysis of the code diff:

1. Vulnerability Existed: no
   No specific vulnerability found
   File: testing/web-platform/tests/css/css-shapes/shape-outside/supported-shapes/circle/shape-outside-circle-044.html
   Old Code: <meta name="flags" content="">
   Fixed Code: (line removed)

Additional notes:
- The diff shows removal of an empty meta "flags" tag, which doesn't appear to be security-related
- This appears to be a test file cleanup rather than a security fix
- No known vulnerabilities are addressed by this change
- The modification is part of normal test maintenance rather than security patching

If an attacker could control the contents of an iframe sandboxed with <code>allow-popups</code> but not <code>allow-scripts</code>, they were able to craft a link that, when clicked, would lead to JavaScript execution in violation of the sandbox. This vulnerability affects Firefox < 98, Firefox ESR < 91.7, and Thunderbird < 91.7.

--- /root/PatchLeaks-main/products/firefox_downloads/FIREFOX_RELEASE_97_END/firefox-FIREFOX_RELEASE_97_END/testing/web-platform/tests/webxr/xr_viewport_scale.https.html+++ /root/PatchLeaks-main/products/firefox_downloads/FIREFOX_RELEASE_98_END/firefox-FIREFOX_RELEASE_98_END/testing/web-platform/tests/webxr/xr_viewport_scale.https.html@@ -22,8 +22,8 @@ }; let containsViewport = function(outer, inner) {-  assert_greater_than_equal(inner.x, outer.x);-  assert_greater_than_equal(inner.y, outer.y);+  assert_less_than_equal(inner.x, outer.x);+  assert_less_than_equal(inner.y, outer.y);   assert_less_than_equal(inner.x + inner.width, outer.x + outer.width);   assert_less_than_equal(inner.y + inner.height, outer.y + outer.height); };

Let me analyze the code diff for potential security vulnerabilities:

1. Vulnerability Existed: not sure
    Logic Error/Incorrect Assertion [File: testing/web-platform/tests/webxr/xr_viewport_scale.https.html] [Lines: 22-23]
    Old Code:
    assert_greater_than_equal(inner.x, outer.x);
    assert_greater_than_equal(inner.y, outer.y);
    Fixed Code:
    assert_less_than_equal(inner.x, outer.x);
    assert_less_than_equal(inner.y, outer.y);

Additional Details:
- This appears to be a correction of logical assertions in a test case rather than a direct security vulnerability
- The change fixes the comparison direction for viewport coordinates (from "greater than or equal" to "less than or equal")
- While not a security vulnerability itself, incorrect test assertions could potentially mask real security issues in the WebXR implementation
- The test verifies viewport containment, which is important for security in XR contexts to prevent unauthorized access to display areas

No clear security vulnerability is present in this diff, but the correction ensures proper testing of viewport boundaries which could have security implications in the broader WebXR context.

If an attacker could control the contents of an iframe sandboxed with <code>allow-popups</code> but not <code>allow-scripts</code>, they were able to craft a link that, when clicked, would lead to JavaScript execution in violation of the sandbox. This vulnerability affects Firefox < 98, Firefox ESR < 91.7, and Thunderbird < 91.7.

--- /root/PatchLeaks-main/products/firefox_downloads/FIREFOX_RELEASE_97_END/firefox-FIREFOX_RELEASE_97_END/third_party/rust/idna/src/make_uts46_mapping_table.py+++ /root/PatchLeaks-main/products/firefox_downloads/FIREFOX_RELEASE_98_END/firefox-FIREFOX_RELEASE_98_END/third_party/rust/idna/src/make_uts46_mapping_table.py@@ -10,12 +10,11 @@ # You can get the latest idna table from # http://www.unicode.org/Public/idna/latest/IdnaMappingTable.txt-from __future__ import print_function import collections import itertools print('''\-// Copyright 2013-2014 The rust-url developers.+// Copyright 2013-2020 The rust-url developers. // // Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 <LICENSE-APACHE or // http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0> or the MIT license@@ -32,7 +31,7 @@     return "\\u{%x}" % ord(c[0]) def char(s):-    return unichr(int(s, 16))+    return chr(int(s, 16)) strtab = collections.OrderedDict() strtab_offset = 0@@ -107,7 +106,7 @@     # the codepoint space.     a, b = itertools.tee(group)     next(b, None)-    for (g1, g2) in itertools.izip(a, b):+    for (g1, g2) in zip(a, b):         last_char = int(g1[1], 16)         next_char = int(g2[0], 16)         if last_char + 1 == next_char:@@ -150,7 +149,7 @@ optimized_ranges = list(merge_single_char_ranges(optimized_ranges))-print("static TABLE: &'static [Range] = &[")+print("static TABLE: &[Range] = &[") for ranges in optimized_ranges:     first = ranges[0][0]@@ -160,7 +159,7 @@ print("];\n")-print("static INDEX_TABLE: &'static [u16] = &[")+print("static INDEX_TABLE: &[u16] = &[") SINGLE_MARKER = 1 << 15@@ -175,7 +174,7 @@ print("];\n")-print("static MAPPING_TABLE: &'static [Mapping] = &[")+print("static MAPPING_TABLE: &[Mapping] = &[") for ranges in optimized_ranges:     for (first, last, mapping, unicode_str) in ranges:@@ -188,5 +187,5 @@ def escape_str(s):     return [escape_char(c) for c in s]-print("static STRING_TABLE: &'static str = \"%s\";"-      % '\\\n  '.join(itertools.chain(*[escape_str(s) for s in strtab.iterkeys()])))+print("static STRING_TABLE: &str = \"%s\";"+      % '\\\n  '.join(itertools.chain(*[escape_str(s) for s in strtab.keys()])))

After analyzing the provided code diff, I don't see any security vulnerabilities being fixed. The changes appear to be primarily modernization updates and Python 3 compatibility changes. Here's the analysis:

1. Vulnerability Existed: no
   Python 3 Compatibility Update [third_party/rust/idna/src/make_uts46_mapping_table.py] [Multiple lines]
   Old Code: Various Python 2 specific syntax (unichr, itertools.izip, strtab.iterkeys, etc.)
   Fixed Code: Updated to Python 3 equivalents (chr, zip, strtab.keys, etc.)

2. Vulnerability Existed: no
   Copyright Year Update [third_party/rust/idna/src/make_uts46_mapping_table.py] [Line 5]
   Old Code: "// Copyright 2013-2014 The rust-url developers."
   Fixed Code: "// Copyright 2013-2020 The rust-url developers."

3. Vulnerability Existed: no
   Static Lifetime Syntax Update [third_party/rust/idna/src/make_uts46_mapping_table.py] [Multiple lines]
   Old Code: "static TABLE: &'static [Range] = &["
   Fixed Code: "static TABLE: &[Range] = &["

The changes are all related to code modernization and Python 3 compatibility rather than security fixes. No security vulnerabilities were identified in this diff.

If an attacker could control the contents of an iframe sandboxed with <code>allow-popups</code> but not <code>allow-scripts</code>, they were able to craft a link that, when clicked, would lead to JavaScript execution in violation of the sandbox. This vulnerability affects Firefox < 98, Firefox ESR < 91.7, and Thunderbird < 91.7.

--- /root/PatchLeaks-main/products/firefox_downloads/FIREFOX_RELEASE_97_END/firefox-FIREFOX_RELEASE_97_END/third_party/rust/darling_core/src/from_derive_input.rs+++ /root/PatchLeaks-main/products/firefox_downloads/FIREFOX_RELEASE_98_END/firefox-FIREFOX_RELEASE_98_END/third_party/rust/darling_core/src/from_derive_input.rs@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ use syn::DeriveInput;-use Result;+use crate::Result; /// Creates an instance by parsing an entire proc-macro `derive` input, /// including the, identity, generics, and visibility of the type.

Analysis of the provided code diff:

1. Vulnerability Existed: no  
   No specific vulnerability [File] third_party/rust/darling_core/src/from_derive_input.rs [Lines] 1-3  
   Old Code: `use Result;`  
   Fixed Code: `use crate::Result;`  

Additional Details:  
This change appears to be a simple code organization/namespace clarification rather than a security fix. The modification makes the import more explicit by specifying the crate path, which is a good practice for code clarity but doesn't address any security vulnerability.  

No other vulnerabilities are apparent in this small diff. The change is purely about code structure and doesn't involve any security-sensitive operations, input handling, or potentially dangerous functionality.

If an attacker could control the contents of an iframe sandboxed with <code>allow-popups</code> but not <code>allow-scripts</code>, they were able to craft a link that, when clicked, would lead to JavaScript execution in violation of the sandbox. This vulnerability affects Firefox < 98, Firefox ESR < 91.7, and Thunderbird < 91.7.

--- /root/PatchLeaks-main/products/firefox_downloads/FIREFOX_RELEASE_97_END/firefox-FIREFOX_RELEASE_97_END/testing/web-platform/tests/css/css-pseudo/grammar-error-002-manual.html+++ /root/PatchLeaks-main/products/firefox_downloads/FIREFOX_RELEASE_98_END/firefox-FIREFOX_RELEASE_98_END/testing/web-platform/tests/css/css-pseudo/grammar-error-002-manual.html@@ -10,7 +10,6 @@   <link rel="help" href="https://www.w3.org/TR/css-pseudo-4/#highlight-selectors">   <link rel="help" href="https://www.w3.org/TR/css-pseudo-4/#highlight-styling">-  <meta content="" name="flags">   <style>   input

Analyzing the provided code diff, here's the security assessment:

1. Vulnerability Existed: no
   No specific vulnerability found [File] testing/web-platform/tests/css/css-pseudo/grammar-error-002-manual.html [Lines] 10
   Old Code: <meta content="" name="flags">
   Fixed Code: (line removed)

Additional details:
- The change simply removes an empty meta tag with a "flags" attribute, which doesn't appear to have any security implications
- This seems to be a cleanup change rather than a security fix
- No known vulnerabilities are associated with this type of change
- The meta tag wasn't serving any apparent purpose in the original code

If an attacker could control the contents of an iframe sandboxed with <code>allow-popups</code> but not <code>allow-scripts</code>, they were able to craft a link that, when clicked, would lead to JavaScript execution in violation of the sandbox. This vulnerability affects Firefox < 98, Firefox ESR < 91.7, and Thunderbird < 91.7.

--- /root/PatchLeaks-main/products/firefox_downloads/FIREFOX_RELEASE_97_END/firefox-FIREFOX_RELEASE_97_END/testing/web-platform/tests/css/css-tables/internal-containing-block-001.html+++ /root/PatchLeaks-main/products/firefox_downloads/FIREFOX_RELEASE_98_END/firefox-FIREFOX_RELEASE_98_END/testing/web-platform/tests/css/css-tables/internal-containing-block-001.html@@ -5,7 +5,6 @@ <link rel="help" href="https://www.w3.org/TR/css-position-3/#valdef-position-absolute"> <link rel="match" href="../reference/ref-filled-green-100px-square.xht"> <link rel="bookmark" href="https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=798164" />-<meta name="flags" content="" /> <meta name="assert" content="A table-row with position:relative establishes a containing block for a position:absolute descendent of a table-cell, and the descendent is positioned correctly." />

Based on the provided diff, I'll analyze it for security fixes:

Vulnerability Existed: no
[No specific vulnerability found] [testing/web-platform/tests/css/css-tables/internal-containing-block-001.html] [Lines 5]
[Old Code: <meta name="flags" content="" />]
[Fixed Code: (removed)]

Additional details:
1. This appears to be a simple test file modification where an empty meta tag for "flags" was removed.
2. The change doesn't appear to be security-related, but rather a cleanup of test metadata.
3. No actual security vulnerability is being addressed here - it's just removing an unused or unnecessary tag.
4. The modification doesn't affect any security-sensitive functionality or introduce/remove any security controls.

The change is more likely related to test maintenance rather than security fixes, as it removes an unused metadata field from a test file.

If an attacker could control the contents of an iframe sandboxed with <code>allow-popups</code> but not <code>allow-scripts</code>, they were able to craft a link that, when clicked, would lead to JavaScript execution in violation of the sandbox. This vulnerability affects Firefox < 98, Firefox ESR < 91.7, and Thunderbird < 91.7.

--- /root/PatchLeaks-main/products/firefox_downloads/FIREFOX_RELEASE_97_END/firefox-FIREFOX_RELEASE_97_END/taskcluster/scripts/misc/android-gradle-dependencies-lite.sh+++ /root/PatchLeaks-main/products/firefox_downloads/FIREFOX_RELEASE_98_END/firefox-FIREFOX_RELEASE_98_END/taskcluster/scripts/misc/android-gradle-dependencies-lite.sh@@ -9,12 +9,13 @@ cd $GECKO_PATH # Needed for Nexus-export PATH=$JAVA_HOME/bin:$PATH+export PATH=$MOZ_FETCHES_DIR/jdk-8/bin:$PATH . taskcluster/scripts/misc/android-gradle-dependencies/before.sh export MOZCONFIG=mobile/android/config/mozconfigs/android-arm-gradle-dependencies/nightly-lite ./mach build+./mach gradle downloadDependencies ./mach android gradle-dependencies . taskcluster/scripts/misc/android-gradle-dependencies/after.sh

Here's the analysis of the provided code diff following the specified format:

1. Vulnerability Existed: yes
   Path Manipulation (Potential) [File] taskcluster/scripts/misc/android-gradle-dependencies-lite.sh [Lines] 9
   Old Code: export PATH=$JAVA_HOME/bin:$PATH
   Fixed Code: export PATH=$MOZ_FETCHES_DIR/jdk-8/bin:$PATH
   Additional Details: The change replaces a potentially uncontrolled JAVA_HOME environment variable with a more specific path under MOZ_FETCHES_DIR. This could prevent path manipulation attacks where an attacker might control JAVA_HOME to point to malicious binaries.

2. Vulnerability Existed: not sure
   Missing Dependency Download Step [File] taskcluster/scripts/misc/android-gradle-dependencies-lite.sh [Lines] 12
   Old Code: (no line existed between ./mach build and ./mach android gradle-dependencies)
   Fixed Code: ./mach gradle downloadDependencies
   Additional Details: The added line ensures dependencies are explicitly downloaded before proceeding. While this might not represent a direct security vulnerability, missing dependency steps could potentially lead to using outdated or insecure cached dependencies.

Note: The first vulnerability is marked as "yes" because the change from using JAVA_HOME to a more controlled path suggests there might have been a security concern about path manipulation. The second item is marked as "not sure" because while it improves the build process, it's unclear if this was specifically addressing a security issue or just improving reliability.

If an attacker could control the contents of an iframe sandboxed with <code>allow-popups</code> but not <code>allow-scripts</code>, they were able to craft a link that, when clicked, would lead to JavaScript execution in violation of the sandbox. This vulnerability affects Firefox < 98, Firefox ESR < 91.7, and Thunderbird < 91.7.

--- /root/PatchLeaks-main/products/firefox_downloads/FIREFOX_RELEASE_97_END/firefox-FIREFOX_RELEASE_97_END/testing/web-platform/tests/html/canvas/offscreen/path-objects/2d.path.moveTo.newsubpath.html+++ /root/PatchLeaks-main/products/firefox_downloads/FIREFOX_RELEASE_98_END/firefox-FIREFOX_RELEASE_98_END/testing/web-platform/tests/html/canvas/offscreen/path-objects/2d.path.moveTo.newsubpath.html@@ -17,8 +17,8 @@ }); t.step(function() {-var offscreenCanvas = new OffscreenCanvas(100, 50);-var ctx = offscreenCanvas.getContext('2d');+var canvas = new OffscreenCanvas(100, 50);+var ctx = canvas.getContext('2d'); ctx.fillStyle = '#0f0'; ctx.fillRect(0, 0, 100, 50);@@ -29,7 +29,7 @@ ctx.moveTo(0, 50); ctx.fillStyle = '#f00'; ctx.fill();-_assertPixel(offscreenCanvas, 50,25, 0,255,0,255, "50,25", "0,255,0,255");+_assertPixel(canvas, 50,25, 0,255,0,255, "50,25", "0,255,0,255"); t.done(); });

Based on the provided code diff, I don't see any security vulnerabilities being fixed. The changes appear to be purely variable renaming for better code clarity. Here's the analysis following your requested format:

Vulnerability Existed: no
[No security vulnerability found] [testing/web-platform/tests/html/canvas/offscreen/path-objects/2d.path.moveTo.newsubpath.html] [Lines 17-29]
[Old Code: var offscreenCanvas = new OffscreenCanvas(100, 50); var ctx = offscreenCanvas.getContext('2d'); ... _assertPixel(offscreenCanvas, 50,25, 0,255,0,255, "50,25", "0,255,0,255");]
[Fixed Code: var canvas = new OffscreenCanvas(100, 50); var ctx = canvas.getContext('2d'); ... _assertPixel(canvas, 50,25, 0,255,0,255, "50,25", "0,255,0,255");]

The changes simply rename the variable 'offscreenCanvas' to 'canvas' throughout the file, which doesn't appear to address any security issues but rather improves code consistency or readability.

If an attacker could control the contents of an iframe sandboxed with <code>allow-popups</code> but not <code>allow-scripts</code>, they were able to craft a link that, when clicked, would lead to JavaScript execution in violation of the sandbox. This vulnerability affects Firefox < 98, Firefox ESR < 91.7, and Thunderbird < 91.7.

--- /root/PatchLeaks-main/products/firefox_downloads/FIREFOX_RELEASE_97_END/firefox-FIREFOX_RELEASE_97_END/testing/web-platform/tests/css/selectors/old-tests/css3-modsel-170c.xml+++ /root/PatchLeaks-main/products/firefox_downloads/FIREFOX_RELEASE_98_END/firefox-FIREFOX_RELEASE_98_END/testing/web-platform/tests/css/selectors/old-tests/css3-modsel-170c.xml@@ -9,7 +9,6 @@   <link rel="author" title="Ian Hickson" href="mailto:[email protected]"/>   <link rel="help" href="https://www.w3.org/TR/css3-selectors/#selectors"/> <!-- bogus link to make sure it gets found -->   <link rel="match" href="reference/this-line-green-color.xht"/>-  <meta name="flags" content="" />  </head>  <body>    <p>This line should be green.</p>

Based on the provided diff, here's the analysis:

Vulnerability Existed: no
No security vulnerability found [File] [Lines 9]
[Old Code]
<meta name="flags" content="" />
[Fixed Code]
(removed line)

Additional Details:
- The change simply removes an empty meta tag with a "flags" attribute, which doesn't appear to have any security implications
- This appears to be a test file cleanup rather than a security fix
- No known vulnerability patterns are present in this change
- The modification doesn't affect any security-sensitive functionality

The change is likely related to test maintenance or cleanup rather than addressing a security issue. There are no indicators of XSS, injection, or other common web vulnerabilities in this modification.

If an attacker could control the contents of an iframe sandboxed with <code>allow-popups</code> but not <code>allow-scripts</code>, they were able to craft a link that, when clicked, would lead to JavaScript execution in violation of the sandbox. This vulnerability affects Firefox < 98, Firefox ESR < 91.7, and Thunderbird < 91.7.

--- /root/PatchLeaks-main/products/firefox_downloads/FIREFOX_RELEASE_97_END/firefox-FIREFOX_RELEASE_97_END/testing/web-platform/tests/html/canvas/offscreen/text/2d.text.draw.fontface.repeat.worker.js+++ /root/PatchLeaks-main/products/firefox_downloads/FIREFOX_RELEASE_98_END/firefox-FIREFOX_RELEASE_98_END/testing/web-platform/tests/html/canvas/offscreen/text/2d.text.draw.fontface.repeat.worker.js@@ -13,8 +13,8 @@ }); t.step(function() {-var offscreenCanvas = new OffscreenCanvas(100, 50);-var ctx = offscreenCanvas.getContext('2d');+var canvas = new OffscreenCanvas(100, 50);+var ctx = canvas.getContext('2d'); var f = new FontFace("CanvasTest", "url('/fonts/CanvasTest.ttf')"); let fonts = (self.fonts ? self.fonts : document.fonts);@@ -27,10 +27,10 @@     ctx.fillStyle = '#0f0';     ctx.fillText('AA', 0, 50);     ctx.fillText('AA', 0, 50);-    _assertPixelApprox(offscreenCanvas, 5,5, 0,255,0,255, "5,5", "0,255,0,255", 2);-    _assertPixelApprox(offscreenCanvas, 95,5, 0,255,0,255, "95,5", "0,255,0,255", 2);-    _assertPixelApprox(offscreenCanvas, 25,25, 0,255,0,255, "25,25", "0,255,0,255", 2);-    _assertPixelApprox(offscreenCanvas, 75,25, 0,255,0,255, "75,25", "0,255,0,255", 2);+    _assertPixelApprox(canvas, 5,5, 0,255,0,255, "5,5", "0,255,0,255", 2);+    _assertPixelApprox(canvas, 95,5, 0,255,0,255, "95,5", "0,255,0,255", 2);+    _assertPixelApprox(canvas, 25,25, 0,255,0,255, "25,25", "0,255,0,255", 2);+    _assertPixelApprox(canvas, 75,25, 0,255,0,255, "75,25", "0,255,0,255", 2);   }).then(t_pass, t_fail); });

After analyzing the provided code diff, I don't see any security vulnerabilities being fixed. The changes appear to be purely variable renaming (from `offscreenCanvas` to `canvas`) and the corresponding updates to function calls using this variable. Here's the analysis:

1. Vulnerability Existed: no
   No Vulnerability Found [File] [Lines 13-14, 27-30]
   [Old Code]
   var offscreenCanvas = new OffscreenCanvas(100, 50);
   var ctx = offscreenCanvas.getContext('2d');
   _assertPixelApprox(offscreenCanvas, 5,5, 0,255,0,255, "5,5", "0,255,0,255", 2);
   
   [Fixed Code]
   var canvas = new OffscreenCanvas(100, 50);
   var ctx = canvas.getContext('2d');
   _assertPixelApprox(canvas, 5,5, 0,255,0,255, "5,5", "0,255,0,255", 2);

The changes are purely cosmetic/refactoring in nature and don't address any security issues. The functionality remains exactly the same, just with a different variable name. There are no security implications to these changes.

If an attacker could control the contents of an iframe sandboxed with <code>allow-popups</code> but not <code>allow-scripts</code>, they were able to craft a link that, when clicked, would lead to JavaScript execution in violation of the sandbox. This vulnerability affects Firefox < 98, Firefox ESR < 91.7, and Thunderbird < 91.7.

--- /root/PatchLeaks-main/products/firefox_downloads/FIREFOX_RELEASE_97_END/firefox-FIREFOX_RELEASE_97_END/remote/doc/marionette/Intro.md+++ /root/PatchLeaks-main/products/firefox_downloads/FIREFOX_RELEASE_98_END/firefox-FIREFOX_RELEASE_98_END/remote/doc/marionette/Intro.md@@ -58,18 +58,15 @@     at a Python command prompt][2]   * Start [writing and running][3] tests   * Tips on [debugging][4] Marionette code-  * [Get a Build][5] – Instructions on how to get a Marionette-enabled-    build of Firefox-  * [Download and setup the Marionette JS client][6]-  * [Protocol definition][7]+  * [Download and setup the Marionette JS client][5]+  * [Protocol definition][6]-[1]: ../../python/marionette_driver.html-[2]: ../../python/marionette_driver.html-[3]: ./PythonTests.html-[4]: ./Debugging.html-[5]: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Marionette/Builds-[6]: https://github.com/mozilla-b2g/marionette_js_client-[7]: ./Protocol.html+[1]: /python/marionette_driver.rst+[2]: /python/marionette_driver.rst+[3]: PythonTests.md+[4]: Debugging.md+[5]: https://github.com/mozilla-b2g/marionette_js_client+[6]: Protocol.md Bugs@@ -79,4 +76,4 @@ component in Bugzilla.  You can view a [list of current bugs] to see if your problem is already being addressed.-[list of current bugs]: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/buglist.cgi?product=Testing&component=Marionette&resolution=---&list_id=1844713+[list of current bugs]: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/buglist.cgi?product=Testing&component=Marionette

Based on the provided diff, this appears to be documentation changes rather than code changes that would introduce or fix security vulnerabilities. Here's the analysis:

Vulnerability Existed: no
No security vulnerability found in documentation update [File] [Lines 58-76]
[Old Code]
[Fixed Code]

The changes include:
1. Removal of "Get a Build" section
2. Updating of links and references (changing from HTML to RST/MD formats)
3. Updating the bug list URL

These are documentation improvements and don't represent any security fixes or introduce any vulnerabilities. The changes appear to be part of normal documentation maintenance and link updates.

No security-related changes were detected in this documentation-only diff.

If an attacker could control the contents of an iframe sandboxed with <code>allow-popups</code> but not <code>allow-scripts</code>, they were able to craft a link that, when clicked, would lead to JavaScript execution in violation of the sandbox. This vulnerability affects Firefox < 98, Firefox ESR < 91.7, and Thunderbird < 91.7.

--- /root/PatchLeaks-main/products/firefox_downloads/FIREFOX_RELEASE_97_END/firefox-FIREFOX_RELEASE_97_END/netwerk/test/http3server/src/main.rs+++ /root/PatchLeaks-main/products/firefox_downloads/FIREFOX_RELEASE_98_END/firefox-FIREFOX_RELEASE_98_END/netwerk/test/http3server/src/main.rs@@ -92,15 +92,21 @@         }     }-    fn handle_streeam_writable(&mut self, mut stream: Http3OrWebTransportStream) {+    fn handle_stream_writable(&mut self, mut stream: Http3OrWebTransportStream) {         if let Some(data) = self.responses.get_mut(&stream) {-            let sent = stream.send_data(&data).unwrap();-            if sent < data.len() {-                let new_d = (*data).split_off(sent);-                *data = new_d;-            } else {-                stream.stream_close_send().unwrap();-                self.responses.remove(&stream);+            match stream.send_data(&data) {+                Ok(sent) => {+                    if sent < data.len() {+                        let new_d = (*data).split_off(sent);+                        *data = new_d;+                    } else {+                        stream.stream_close_send().unwrap();+                        self.responses.remove(&stream);+                    }+                }+                Err(_) => {+                    eprintln!("Unexpected error");+                }             }         }     }@@ -329,7 +335,7 @@                         }                     }                 }-                Http3ServerEvent::DataWritable { stream } => self.handle_streeam_writable(stream),+                Http3ServerEvent::DataWritable { stream } => self.handle_stream_writable(stream),                 Http3ServerEvent::StateChange { conn, state } => {                     if matches!(state, neqo_http3::Http3State::Connected) {                         let mut h = DefaultHasher::new();

Here's the analysis of the provided code diff:

1. Vulnerability Existed: yes
   Error Handling Vulnerability [netwerk/test/http3server/src/main.rs] [Lines 92-108]
   [Old Code]
   ```rust
   fn handle_streeam_writable(&mut self, mut stream: Http3OrWebTransportStream) {
       if let Some(data) = self.responses.get_mut(&stream) {
           let sent = stream.send_data(&data).unwrap();
           if sent < data.len() {
               let new_d = (*data).split_off(sent);
               *data = new_d;
           } else {
               stream.stream_close_send().unwrap();
               self.responses.remove(&stream);
           }
       }
   }
   ```
   [Fixed Code]
   ```rust
   fn handle_stream_writable(&mut self, mut stream: Http3OrWebTransportStream) {
       if let Some(data) = self.responses.get_mut(&stream) {
           match stream.send_data(&data) {
               Ok(sent) => {
                   if sent < data.len() {
                       let new_d = (*data).split_off(sent);
                       *data = new_d;
                   } else {
                       stream.stream_close_send().unwrap();
                       self.responses.remove(&stream);
                   }
               }
               Err(_) => {
                   eprintln!("Unexpected error");
               }
           }
       }
   }
   ```

2. Vulnerability Existed: not sure
   Typo in Function Name [netwerk/test/http3server/src/main.rs] [Lines 92, 335]
   [Old Code]
   ```rust
   fn handle_streeam_writable(&mut self, mut stream: Http3OrWebTransportStream)
   Http3ServerEvent::DataWritable { stream } => self.handle_streeam_writable(stream),
   ```
   [Fixed Code]
   ```rust
   fn handle_stream_writable(&mut self, mut stream: Http3OrWebTransportStream)
   Http3ServerEvent::DataWritable { stream } => self.handle_stream_writable(stream),
   ```

The main security fix is the addition of proper error handling for the `send_data` operation. The original code used `unwrap()` which could panic if the operation failed, potentially causing the server to crash. The fixed version properly handles the error case, though it only prints an error message rather than taking more robust action.

The function name change from `handle_streeam_writable` to `handle_stream_writable` appears to be just a typo fix, though it's possible this could have had security implications if the typo prevented the function from being called properly in some cases.

If an attacker could control the contents of an iframe sandboxed with <code>allow-popups</code> but not <code>allow-scripts</code>, they were able to craft a link that, when clicked, would lead to JavaScript execution in violation of the sandbox. This vulnerability affects Firefox < 98, Firefox ESR < 91.7, and Thunderbird < 91.7.

--- /root/PatchLeaks-main/products/firefox_downloads/FIREFOX_RELEASE_97_END/firefox-FIREFOX_RELEASE_97_END/third_party/rust/wgpu-core/src/pipeline.rs+++ /root/PatchLeaks-main/products/firefox_downloads/FIREFOX_RELEASE_98_END/firefox-FIREFOX_RELEASE_98_END/third_party/rust/wgpu-core/src/pipeline.rs@@ -270,6 +270,8 @@     FormatNotBlendable(wgt::TextureFormat),     #[error("format {0:?} does not have a color aspect")]     FormatNotColor(wgt::TextureFormat),+    #[error("format {0:?} can't be multisampled")]+    FormatNotMultisampled(wgt::TextureFormat),     #[error("output format {pipeline} is incompatible with the shader {shader}")]     IncompatibleFormat {         pipeline: validation::NumericType,@@ -287,6 +289,8 @@     FormatNotDepth(wgt::TextureFormat),     #[error("format {0:?} does not have a stencil aspect, but stencil test/write is enabled")]     FormatNotStencil(wgt::TextureFormat),+    #[error("format {0:?} can't be multisampled")]+    FormatNotMultisampled(wgt::TextureFormat), } #[derive(Clone, Debug, Error)]

Here's the analysis of the provided code diff:

1. Vulnerability Existed: not sure
    [Potential Input Validation Improvement] [third_party/rust/wgpu-core/src/pipeline.rs] [Lines 270-289]
    [Old Code]
    FormatNotBlendable(wgt::TextureFormat),
    #[error("format {0:?} does not have a color aspect")]
    FormatNotColor(wgt::TextureFormat),
    [error("output format {pipeline} is incompatible with the shader {shader}")]
    IncompatibleFormat {
        pipeline: validation::NumericType,
        shader: validation::NumericType,
    },
    #[error("format {0:?} does not have a depth aspect, but depth test/write is enabled")]
    FormatNotDepth(wgt::TextureFormat),
    #[error("format {0:?} does not have a stencil aspect, but stencil test/write is enabled")]
    FormatNotStencil(wgt::TextureFormat),

    [Fixed Code]
    FormatNotBlendable(wgt::TextureFormat),
    #[error("format {0:?} does not have a color aspect")]
    FormatNotColor(wgt::TextureFormat),
    #[error("format {0:?} can't be multisampled")]
    FormatNotMultisampled(wgt::TextureFormat),
    #[error("output format {pipeline} is incompatible with the shader {shader}")]
    IncompatibleFormat {
        pipeline: validation::NumericType,
        shader: validation::NumericType,
    },
    #[error("format {0:?} does not have a depth aspect, but depth test/write is enabled")]
    FormatNotDepth(wgt::TextureFormat),
    #[error("format {0:?} does not have a stencil aspect, but stencil test/write is enabled")]
    FormatNotStencil(wgt::TextureFormat),
    #[error("format {0:?} can't be multisampled")]
    FormatNotMultisampled(wgt::TextureFormat),

Additional Details:
- The diff adds a new error variant `FormatNotMultisampled` for texture formats that can't be multisampled, appearing in two places in the error enum.
- While this improves input validation, it's not clear if this was fixing an actual security vulnerability or just improving error handling.
- The change could potentially prevent misuse of the API that might lead to undefined behavior, but without more context about how this error is used, we can't be certain about security implications.

If an attacker could control the contents of an iframe sandboxed with <code>allow-popups</code> but not <code>allow-scripts</code>, they were able to craft a link that, when clicked, would lead to JavaScript execution in violation of the sandbox. This vulnerability affects Firefox < 98, Firefox ESR < 91.7, and Thunderbird < 91.7.

--- /root/PatchLeaks-main/products/firefox_downloads/FIREFOX_RELEASE_97_END/firefox-FIREFOX_RELEASE_97_END/testing/web-platform/tests/css/css-backgrounds/background-clip-006.html+++ /root/PatchLeaks-main/products/firefox_downloads/FIREFOX_RELEASE_98_END/firefox-FIREFOX_RELEASE_98_END/testing/web-platform/tests/css/css-backgrounds/background-clip-006.html@@ -17,7 +17,6 @@     2.2. Value Types     http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-background/#value-types     -->-    <meta name="flags" content="">     <meta name="assert" content="Background-clip with 'inherit' implies to inherit its parent element value to paint the background area.">     <style>         #container {

Analysis of the code diff:

1. Vulnerability Existed: not sure  
   [Potential Information Disclosure] [testing/web-platform/tests/css/css-backgrounds/background-clip-006.html] [Lines 17]  
   Old Code: `<meta name="flags" content="">`  
   Fixed Code: (line removed)  

Additional Details: The removal of an empty meta tag named "flags" might indicate a cleanup of potentially sensitive information or test configuration flags. While not clearly a security vulnerability, empty or improperly configured meta tags could potentially expose test environment details if misused. The exact security impact is unclear without knowing the intended use of this flag.

If an attacker could control the contents of an iframe sandboxed with <code>allow-popups</code> but not <code>allow-scripts</code>, they were able to craft a link that, when clicked, would lead to JavaScript execution in violation of the sandbox. This vulnerability affects Firefox < 98, Firefox ESR < 91.7, and Thunderbird < 91.7.

--- /root/PatchLeaks-main/products/firefox_downloads/FIREFOX_RELEASE_97_END/firefox-FIREFOX_RELEASE_97_END/testing/web-platform/tests/html/canvas/offscreen/text/2d.text.draw.baseline.alphabetic.html+++ /root/PatchLeaks-main/products/firefox_downloads/FIREFOX_RELEASE_98_END/firefox-FIREFOX_RELEASE_98_END/testing/web-platform/tests/html/canvas/offscreen/text/2d.text.draw.baseline.alphabetic.html@@ -17,8 +17,8 @@ }); t.step(function() {-var offscreenCanvas = new OffscreenCanvas(100, 50);-var ctx = offscreenCanvas.getContext('2d');+var canvas = new OffscreenCanvas(100, 50);+var ctx = canvas.getContext('2d'); var f = new FontFace("CanvasTest", "url('/fonts/CanvasTest.ttf')"); let fonts = (self.fonts ? self.fonts : document.fonts);@@ -31,12 +31,12 @@     ctx.fillStyle = '#0f0';     ctx.textBaseline = 'alphabetic';     ctx.fillText('CC', 0, 37.5);-    _assertPixelApprox(offscreenCanvas, 5,5, 0,255,0,255, "5,5", "0,255,0,255", 2);-    _assertPixelApprox(offscreenCanvas, 95,5, 0,255,0,255, "95,5", "0,255,0,255", 2);-    _assertPixelApprox(offscreenCanvas, 25,25, 0,255,0,255, "25,25", "0,255,0,255", 2);-    _assertPixelApprox(offscreenCanvas, 75,25, 0,255,0,255, "75,25", "0,255,0,255", 2);-    _assertPixelApprox(offscreenCanvas, 5,45, 0,255,0,255, "5,45", "0,255,0,255", 2);-    _assertPixelApprox(offscreenCanvas, 95,45, 0,255,0,255, "95,45", "0,255,0,255", 2);+    _assertPixelApprox(canvas, 5,5, 0,255,0,255, "5,5", "0,255,0,255", 2);+    _assertPixelApprox(canvas, 95,5, 0,255,0,255, "95,5", "0,255,0,255", 2);+    _assertPixelApprox(canvas, 25,25, 0,255,0,255, "25,25", "0,255,0,255", 2);+    _assertPixelApprox(canvas, 75,25, 0,255,0,255, "75,25", "0,255,0,255", 2);+    _assertPixelApprox(canvas, 5,45, 0,255,0,255, "5,45", "0,255,0,255", 2);+    _assertPixelApprox(canvas, 95,45, 0,255,0,255, "95,45", "0,255,0,255", 2);   }).then(t_pass, t_fail); });

After analyzing the provided code diff, I don't find any security vulnerabilities. The changes appear to be purely variable renaming (from `offscreenCanvas` to `canvas`) and updating the corresponding references in the test assertions. Here's the analysis:

1. Vulnerability Existed: no
   No security vulnerability found
   File: testing/web-platform/tests/html/canvas/offscreen/text/2d.text.draw.baseline.alphabetic.html
   Lines: 17-18, 31-36
   Old Code: var offscreenCanvas = new OffscreenCanvas(100, 50); var ctx = offscreenCanvas.getContext('2d');
   Fixed Code: var canvas = new OffscreenCanvas(100, 50); var ctx = canvas.getContext('2d');

2. Vulnerability Existed: no
   No security vulnerability found
   File: testing/web-platform/tests/html/canvas/offscreen/text/2d.text.draw.baseline.alphabetic.html
   Lines: 31-36
   Old Code: _assertPixelApprox(offscreenCanvas, ...) (multiple instances)
   Fixed Code: _assertPixelApprox(canvas, ...) (multiple instances)

The changes are purely cosmetic/refactoring in nature and don't affect security. The test functionality remains the same, only the variable name has been changed for consistency or clarity.

If an attacker could control the contents of an iframe sandboxed with <code>allow-popups</code> but not <code>allow-scripts</code>, they were able to craft a link that, when clicked, would lead to JavaScript execution in violation of the sandbox. This vulnerability affects Firefox < 98, Firefox ESR < 91.7, and Thunderbird < 91.7.

--- /root/PatchLeaks-main/products/firefox_downloads/FIREFOX_RELEASE_97_END/firefox-FIREFOX_RELEASE_97_END/browser/components/newtab/data/content/activity-stream.bundle.js+++ /root/PatchLeaks-main/products/firefox_downloads/FIREFOX_RELEASE_98_END/firefox-FIREFOX_RELEASE_98_END/browser/components/newtab/data/content/activity-stream.bundle.js@@ -716,6 +716,7 @@     const noSectionsEnabled = !prefs["feeds.topsites"] && !pocketEnabled && filteredSections.filter(section => section.enabled).length === 0;     const searchHandoffEnabled = prefs["improvesearch.handoffToAwesomebar"];     const showCustomizationMenu = this.state.customizeMenuVisible;+    const showColorwayCloset = prefs["colorway-closet.enabled"];     const enabledSections = {       topSitesEnabled: prefs["feeds.topsites"],       pocketEnabled: prefs["feeds.section.topstories"],@@ -738,7 +739,8 @@       enabledSections: enabledSections,       pocketRegion: pocketRegion,       mayHaveSponsoredTopSites: mayHaveSponsoredTopSites,-      showing: showCustomizationMenu+      showing: showCustomizationMenu,+      showColorwayCloset: showColorwayCloset     }), /*#__PURE__*/react__WEBPACK_IMPORTED_MODULE_8___default.a.createElement("div", {       className: outerClassName,       onClick: this.closeCustomizationMenu@@ -2135,7 +2137,7 @@       className: "icon icon-small-spacer icon-info"     }), " ", /*#__PURE__*/react__WEBPACK_IMPORTED_MODULE_3___default.a.createElement("span", null, "Need help using these tools? Check out our", " ", /*#__PURE__*/react__WEBPACK_IMPORTED_MODULE_3___default.a.createElement("a", {       target: "blank",-      href: "https://github.com/mozilla/activity-stream/blob/master/content-src/asrouter/docs/debugging-docs.md"+      href: "https://firefox-source-docs.mozilla.org/browser/components/newtab/content-src/asrouter/docs/index.html"     }, "documentation"))), this.getSection()));   }@@ -2363,7 +2365,8 @@  * file, You can obtain one at http://mozilla.org/MPL/2.0/. */-const MESSAGE_TYPE_LIST = ["BLOCK_MESSAGE_BY_ID", "USER_ACTION", "IMPRESSION", "TRIGGER", "NEWTAB_MESSAGE_REQUEST", "DOORHANGER_TELEMETRY", "TOOLBAR_BADGE_TELEMETRY", "TOOLBAR_PANEL_TELEMETRY", "MOMENTS_PAGE_TELEMETRY", "INFOBAR_TELEMETRY", "SPOTLIGHT_TELEMETRY", "AS_ROUTER_TELEMETRY_USER_EVENT", // Admin types+const MESSAGE_TYPE_LIST = ["BLOCK_MESSAGE_BY_ID", "USER_ACTION", "IMPRESSION", "TRIGGER", "NEWTAB_MESSAGE_REQUEST", // PB is Private Browsing+"PBNEWTAB_MESSAGE_REQUEST", "DOORHANGER_TELEMETRY", "TOOLBAR_BADGE_TELEMETRY", "TOOLBAR_PANEL_TELEMETRY", "MOMENTS_PAGE_TELEMETRY", "INFOBAR_TELEMETRY", "SPOTLIGHT_TELEMETRY", "AS_ROUTER_TELEMETRY_USER_EVENT", // Admin types "ADMIN_CONNECT_STATE", "UNBLOCK_MESSAGE_BY_ID", "UNBLOCK_ALL", "BLOCK_BUNDLE", "UNBLOCK_BUNDLE", "DISABLE_PROVIDER", "ENABLE_PROVIDER", "EVALUATE_JEXL_EXPRESSION", "EXPIRE_QUERY_CACHE", "FORCE_ATTRIBUTION", "FORCE_WHATSNEW_PANEL", "CLOSE_WHATSNEW_PANEL", "OVERRIDE_MESSAGE", "MODIFY_MESSAGE_JSON", "RESET_PROVIDER_PREF", "SET_PROVIDER_USER_PREF", "RESET_GROUPS_STATE"]; const MESSAGE_TYPE_HASH = MESSAGE_TYPE_LIST.reduce((hash, value) => {   hash[value] = value;@@ -3290,7 +3293,9 @@           type: component.type,           dispatch: this.props.dispatch,           items: component.properties.items,-          compact: component.properties.compact,+          hybridLayout: component.properties.hybridLayout,+          hideCardBackground: component.properties.hideCardBackground,+          fourCardLayout: component.properties.fourCardLayout,           hideDescriptions: component.properties.hideDescriptions,           compactGrid: component.properties.compactGrid,           compactImages: component.properties.compactImages,@@ -3301,7 +3306,7 @@           essentialReadsHeader: component.properties.essentialReadsHeader,           editorsPicksHeader: component.properties.editorsPicksHeader,           readTime: component.properties.readTime,-          loadMoreEnabled: component.loadMoreEnabled,+          loadMore: component.loadMore,           lastCardMessageEnabled: component.lastCardMessageEnabled,           saveToPocketCard: component.saveToPocketCard,           cta_variant: component.cta_variant,@@ -13775,11 +13780,11 @@   get showLoadMore() {     const {-      loadMoreEnabled,+      loadMore,       data,       loadMoreThreshold     } = this.props;-    return loadMoreEnabled && data.recommendations.length > loadMoreThreshold && !this.state.moreLoaded;+    return loadMore && data.recommendations.length > loadMoreThreshold && !this.state.moreLoaded;   }   renderDSSubHeader(title) {@@ -13796,10 +13801,12 @@   renderCards() {     let {-      items,-      compact+      items     } = this.props;     const {+      hybridLayout,+      hideCardBackground,+      fourCardLayout,       hideDescriptions,       lastCardMessageEnabled,       saveToPocketCard,@@ -13871,8 +13878,8 @@     if (essentialReadsHeader && editorsPicksHeader) {-      // For compact second row is 8 cards, and regular it is 6 cards.-      if (compact) {+      // For 4 card row layouts, second row is 8 cards, and regular it is 6 cards.+      if (fourCardLayout) {         cards.splice(8, 0, this.renderDSSubHeader("Editor’s Picks"));       } else {         cards.splice(6, 0, this.renderDSSubHeader("Editor’s Picks"));@@ -13888,11 +13895,13 @@     const variantClass = this.props.display_variant ? `ds-card-grid-${this.props.display_variant}` : ``;-    const compactClass = compact ? `ds-card-grid-compact-variant` : ``;+    const hideCardBackgroundClass = hideCardBackground ? `ds-card-grid-hide-background` : ``;+    const fourCardLayoutClass = fourCardLayout ? `ds-card-grid-four-card-variant` : ``;     const hideDescriptionsClassName = !hideDescriptions ? `ds-card-grid-include-descriptions` : ``;     const compactGridClassName = compactGrid ? `ds-card-grid-compact` : ``;+    const hybridLayoutClassName = hybridLayout ? `ds-card-grid-hybrid-layout` : ``;     return /*#__PURE__*/external_React_default.a.createElement("div", {-      className: `ds-card-grid ds-card-grid-${this.props.border} ${variantClass} ${compactClass} ${hideDescriptionsClassName} ${compactGridClassName}`+      className: `ds-card-grid ds-card-grid-${this.props.border} ${variantClass} ${hybridLayoutClassName} ${hideCardBackgroundClass} ${fourCardLayoutClass} ${hideDescriptionsClassName} ${compactGridClassName}`     }, cards);   }@@ -13950,17 +13959,6 @@ var external_React_ = __webpack_require__(8); var external_React_default = /*#__PURE__*/__webpack_require__.n(external_React_);-// CONCATENATED MODULE: ./content-src/components/CustomizeMenu/ThemesSection/ThemesSection.jsx-/* This Source Code Form is subject to the terms of the Mozilla Public- * License, v. 2.0. If a copy of the MPL was not distributed with this file,- * You can obtain one at http://mozilla.org/MPL/2.0/. */--class ThemesSection_ThemesSection extends external_React_default.a.PureComponent {-  render() {-    return /*#__PURE__*/external_React_default.a.createElement("div", null);-  }--} // CONCATENATED MODULE: ./content-src/components/CustomizeMenu/BackgroundsSection/BackgroundsSection.jsx /* This Source Code Form is subject to the terms of the Mozilla Public  * License, v. 2.0. If a copy of the MPL was not distributed with this file,@@ -14191,6 +14189,16 @@ // EXTERNAL MODULE: external "ReactTransitionGroup" var external_ReactTransitionGroup_ = __webpack_require__(25);+// CONCATENATED MODULE: ./content-src/components/CustomizeMenu/ColorwayCloset/ColorwayCloset.jsx+/* This Source Code Form is subject to the terms of the Mozilla Public+ * License, v. 2.0. If a copy of the MPL was not distributed with this file,+ * You can obtain one at http://mozilla.org/MPL/2.0/. */++const ColorwayCloset = ({+  dispatch+}) => /*#__PURE__*/external_React_default.a.createElement("div", {+  id: "colorway-closet"+}, "Colorway Closet Placeholder"); // CONCATENATED MODULE: ./content-src/components/CustomizeMenu/CustomizeMenu.jsx /* harmony export (binding) */ __webpack_require__.d(__webpack_exports__, "_CustomizeMenu", function() { return CustomizeMenu_CustomizeMenu; }); /* harmony export (binding) */ __webpack_require__.d(__webpack_exports__, "CustomizeMenu", function() { return CustomizeMenu; });@@ -14249,7 +14257,9 @@       className: "close-button",       "data-l10n-id": "newtab-custom-close-button",       ref: c => this.closeButton = c-    }), /*#__PURE__*/external_React_default.a.createElement(ThemesSection_ThemesSection, null), /*#__PURE__*/external_React_default.a.createElement(BackgroundsSection_BackgroundsSection, null), /*#__PURE__*/external_React_default.a.createElement(ContentSection_ContentSection, {+    }), this.props.showColorwayCloset ? /*#__PURE__*/external_React_default.a.createElement(ColorwayCloset, {+      dispatch: this.props.dispatch+    }) : /*#__PURE__*/external_React_default.a.createElement(external_React_default.a.Fragment, null), /*#__PURE__*/external_React_default.a.createElement(BackgroundsSection_BackgroundsSection, null), /*#__PURE__*/external_React_default.a.createElement(ContentSection_ContentSection, {       openPreferences: this.props.openPreferences,       setPref: this.props.setPref,       enabledSections: this.props.enabledSections,

Based on the provided code diff, I'll analyze it for security fixes following the required format:

1. Vulnerability Existed: not sure
   [Link Target Vulnerability] [browser/components/newtab/data/content/activity-stream.bundle.js] [Lines 2135-2137]
   [Old Code]
   target: "blank",
   href: "https://github.com/mozilla/activity-stream/blob/master/content-src/asrouter/docs/debugging-docs.md"
   [Fixed Code]
   target: "blank",
   href: "https://firefox-source-docs.mozilla.org/browser/components/newtab/content-src/asrouter/docs/index.html"

2. Vulnerability Existed: not sure
   [Message Type Addition] [browser/components/newtab/data/content/activity-stream.bundle.js] [Lines 2363-2365]
   [Old Code]
   const MESSAGE_TYPE_LIST = ["BLOCK_MESSAGE_BY_ID", "USER_ACTION", "IMPRESSION", "TRIGGER", "NEWTAB_MESSAGE_REQUEST", "DOORHANGER_TELEMETRY", "TOOLBAR_BADGE_TELEMETRY", "TOOLBAR_PANEL_TELEMETRY", "MOMENTS_PAGE_TELEMETRY", "INFOBAR_TELEMETRY", "SPOTLIGHT_TELEMETRY", "AS_ROUTER_TELEMETRY_USER_EVENT", // Admin types
   [Fixed Code]
   const MESSAGE_TYPE_LIST = ["BLOCK_MESSAGE_BY_ID", "USER_ACTION", "IMPRESSION", "TRIGGER", "NEWTAB_MESSAGE_REQUEST", // PB is Private Browsing
   "PBNEWTAB_MESSAGE_REQUEST", "DOORHANGER_TELEMETRY", "TOOLBAR_BADGE_TELEMETRY", "TOOLBAR_PANEL_TELEMETRY", "MOMENTS_PAGE_TELEMETRY", "INFOBAR_TELEMETRY", "SPOTLIGHT_TELEMETRY", "AS_ROUTER_TELEMETRY_USER_EVENT", // Admin types

3. Vulnerability Existed: no
   [Code Restructuring] [browser/components/newtab/data/content/activity-stream.bundle.js] [Lines 3290-3301]
   [Old Code]
   compact: component.properties.compact,
   [Fixed Code]
   hybridLayout: component.properties.hybridLayout,
   hideCardBackground: component.properties.hideCardBackground,
   fourCardLayout: component.properties.fourCardLayout,

4. Vulnerability Existed: no
   [Feature Addition] [browser/components/newtab/data/content/activity-stream.bundle.js] [Lines 716-738]
   [Old Code]
   const showCustomizationMenu = this.state.customizeMenuVisible;
   [Fixed Code]
   const showCustomizationMenu = this.state.customizeMenuVisible;
   const showColorwayCloset = prefs["colorway-closet.enabled"];

Note: While I've identified several changes, only the first two might have security implications:
1. The link target change could be related to security if the old link was vulnerable (though I can't confirm this)
2. The message type addition could potentially introduce new attack vectors if not properly secured, but there's no evidence of vulnerability in the change itself

The other changes appear to be feature additions and code restructuring with no obvious security implications.

If an attacker could control the contents of an iframe sandboxed with <code>allow-popups</code> but not <code>allow-scripts</code>, they were able to craft a link that, when clicked, would lead to JavaScript execution in violation of the sandbox. This vulnerability affects Firefox < 98, Firefox ESR < 91.7, and Thunderbird < 91.7.

--- /root/PatchLeaks-main/products/firefox_downloads/FIREFOX_RELEASE_97_END/firefox-FIREFOX_RELEASE_97_END/testing/web-platform/tests/css/css-round-display/polar-origin-and-anchor-005.html+++ /root/PatchLeaks-main/products/firefox_downloads/FIREFOX_RELEASE_98_END/firefox-FIREFOX_RELEASE_98_END/testing/web-platform/tests/css/css-round-display/polar-origin-and-anchor-005.html@@ -4,7 +4,6 @@ 		<title>CSS Test: Position an element with 'polar-origin' and 'polar-anchor'</title> 		<link rel="author" title="Jihye Hong" href="mailto:[email protected]" /> 		<link rel="help" href="https://www.w3.org/TR/motion-1/#motion-paths-overview/">-		<meta name="flags" content=""> 		<meta name="assert" content="Test checks that the position of an element specified with 'polar-origin' and 'polar-anchor'."> 		<style type="text/css"> 		    .container {

Based on the provided diff, I'll analyze it for security vulnerabilities:

    Vulnerability Existed: no
    No security vulnerability found [testing/web-platform/tests/css/css-round-display/polar-origin-and-anchor-005.html] [Lines 4-7]
    [Old Code]
    <link rel="help" href="https://www.w3.org/TR/motion-1/#motion-paths-overview/">
    <meta name="flags" content="">
    [Fixed Code]
    <link rel="help" href="https://www.w3.org/TR/motion-1/#motion-paths-overview/">

The change simply removes an empty meta tag with name="flags" which doesn't appear to have any security implications. This seems to be a minor cleanup rather than a security fix. The remaining content appears to be standard HTML test case markup without any security concerns.

If an attacker could control the contents of an iframe sandboxed with <code>allow-popups</code> but not <code>allow-scripts</code>, they were able to craft a link that, when clicked, would lead to JavaScript execution in violation of the sandbox. This vulnerability affects Firefox < 98, Firefox ESR < 91.7, and Thunderbird < 91.7.

--- /root/PatchLeaks-main/products/firefox_downloads/FIREFOX_RELEASE_97_END/firefox-FIREFOX_RELEASE_97_END/dom/push/test/test_try_registering_offline_disabled.html+++ /root/PatchLeaks-main/products/firefox_downloads/FIREFOX_RELEASE_98_END/firefox-FIREFOX_RELEASE_98_END/dom/push/test/test_try_registering_offline_disabled.html@@ -299,8 +299,9 @@     .then(SimpleTest.finish);   }-  setupPrefsAndMockSocket(new MockWebSocket()).then(_ => runTest());-  SpecialPowers.addPermission("desktop-notification", true, document);+  setupPrefsAndMockSocket(new MockWebSocket())+    .then(_ => setPushPermission(true))+    .then(_ => runTest());   SimpleTest.waitForExplicitFinish(); </script> </body>

Let me analyze the code diff for potential security fixes.

Vulnerability Existed: not sure
[Potential Permission Handling Issue] [dom/push/test/test_try_registering_offline_disabled.html] [Lines 299-303]
[Old Code]
  setupPrefsAndMockSocket(new MockWebSocket()).then(_ => runTest());
  SpecialPowers.addPermission("desktop-notification", true, document);
[Fixed Code]
  setupPrefsAndMockSocket(new MockWebSocket())
    .then(_ => setPushPermission(true))
    .then(_ => runTest());

Additional Details:
1. The main change is in how permissions are handled during test setup. The old code directly added a desktop-notification permission while the new code uses a setPushPermission function in the promise chain.
2. This appears to be more about proper test sequencing than a direct security fix, but could potentially relate to permission handling security.
3. The removal of SpecialPowers.addPermission for desktop-notification might indicate a change in permission requirements for the test.

If an attacker could control the contents of an iframe sandboxed with <code>allow-popups</code> but not <code>allow-scripts</code>, they were able to craft a link that, when clicked, would lead to JavaScript execution in violation of the sandbox. This vulnerability affects Firefox < 98, Firefox ESR < 91.7, and Thunderbird < 91.7.

--- /root/PatchLeaks-main/products/firefox_downloads/FIREFOX_RELEASE_97_END/firefox-FIREFOX_RELEASE_97_END/third_party/rust/neqo-common/src/incrdecoder.rs+++ /root/PatchLeaks-main/products/firefox_downloads/FIREFOX_RELEASE_98_END/firefox-FIREFOX_RELEASE_98_END/third_party/rust/neqo-common/src/incrdecoder.rs@@ -108,8 +108,12 @@ } impl IncrementalDecoderIgnore {+    /// Make a new ignoring decoder.+    /// # Panics+    /// If the amount to ignore is zero.     #[must_use]     pub fn new(n: usize) -> Self {+        assert_ne!(n, 0);         Self { remaining: n }     }

Here's the analysis of the provided code diff:

Vulnerability Existed: yes  
Integer Overflow/Underflow Vulnerability [third_party/rust/neqo-common/src/incrdecoder.rs] [Lines 108-112]  
[Old Code]  
```rust
pub fn new(n: usize) -> Self {
    Self { remaining: n }
}
```  
[Fixed Code]  
```rust
pub fn new(n: usize) -> Self {
    assert_ne!(n, 0);
    Self { remaining: n }
}
```

The vulnerability appears to be related to potential zero-length handling which could lead to integer underflow or other boundary condition issues. The fix adds an assertion to ensure the input value isn't zero, which suggests the original code could have problems when n=0. While not explicitly stated, this is likely a defensive programming measure against potential arithmetic issues when decrementing the remaining counter.

The vulnerability name isn't explicitly documented in the diff, but based on the pattern of adding checks for zero values, it's likely related to boundary condition handling that could lead to arithmetic underflow or other issues when processing the remaining counter.

If an attacker could control the contents of an iframe sandboxed with <code>allow-popups</code> but not <code>allow-scripts</code>, they were able to craft a link that, when clicked, would lead to JavaScript execution in violation of the sandbox. This vulnerability affects Firefox < 98, Firefox ESR < 91.7, and Thunderbird < 91.7.