Skip to content

Remove Core stop/start for fingerprint dialog#8251

Merged
nbolton merged 3 commits intomasterfrom
noStopOnPrintCheck
Feb 27, 2025
Merged

Remove Core stop/start for fingerprint dialog#8251
nbolton merged 3 commits intomasterfrom
noStopOnPrintCheck

Conversation

@sithlord48
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@sithlord48 sithlord48 commented Feb 26, 2025 •
edited
Loading

@sithlord48 sithlord48 requested a review from nbolton February 26, 2025 17:41
@sithlord48 sithlord48 mentioned this pull request Feb 26, 2025
Merged
9 tasks
nbolton
nbolton reviewed Feb 27, 2025
View reviewed changes
nbolton
nbolton requested changes Feb 27, 2025
View reviewed changes
@sithlord48 sithlord48 force-pushed the noStopOnPrintCheck branch 2 times, most recently from b6ac230 to 9069cae Compare February 27, 2025 12:31
@sithlord48 sithlord48 requested a review from nbolton February 27, 2025 12:32
@nbolton
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

nbolton commented Feb 27, 2025 •
edited
Loading

No stop on print check

A more helpful PR title would be:

  • Remove Core stop/start for fingerprint dialog

@nbolton
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

nbolton commented Feb 27, 2025

The fingerprint dialog should have an 'Ignore' button where you can ignore the client for at least the duration of the running GUI process. The QList solution above would also solve this.

Any thoughts on changing "No" to "Ignore" to make the purpose of the button clearer?

@sithlord48 sithlord48 changed the title No stop on print check Remove Core stop/start for fingerprint dialog Feb 27, 2025
@sithlord48
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

sithlord48 commented Feb 27, 2025

The fingerprint dialog should have an 'Ignore' button where you can ignore the client for at least the duration of the running GUI process. The QList solution above would also solve this.

Any thoughts on changing "No" to "Ignore" to make the purpose of the button clearer?

Yes contextually "no" is the right answer.. We do not want to accept the we do not want to allow the client to connect. Either way that is not in scope for this pr

@sithlord48 sithlord48 force-pushed the noStopOnPrintCheck branch 2 times, most recently from ca23340 to 6980355 Compare February 27, 2025 13:13
nbolton
nbolton requested changes Feb 27, 2025
View reviewed changes
@sithlord48 sithlord48 requested a review from nbolton February 27, 2025 13:35
nbolton
nbolton requested changes Feb 27, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@nbolton nbolton left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You're almost there but your last change didn't completely solve the class decl chaos.

@sithlord48 sithlord48 requested a review from nbolton February 27, 2025 14:56
nbolton
nbolton requested changes Feb 27, 2025
View reviewed changes
@sithlord48
refactor: do not stop sever on new client fingerprint, track the last…
7f61216 
… print we checked and if we are chekcing it do not show a new box
@nbolton nbolton enabled auto-merge (rebase) February 27, 2025 15:03
@nbolton nbolton merged commit 4f2ef71 into master Feb 27, 2025
29 checks passed
@nbolton nbolton deleted the noStopOnPrintCheck branch February 27, 2025 15:07
@nbolton nbolton mentioned this pull request Feb 27, 2025
Closed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@nbolton nbolton nbolton approved these changes

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

DoS vulnerability: Bad actor can spam the GUI with fingerprint dialogs and stop the server

2 participants

@sithlord48 @nbolton