Fix branding/official build confusion in os_crypt.

Fix branding/official build confusion in os_crypt.

TBR=cfroussios@chromium.org

Committed: https://crrev.com/c0bfd647f33d33086f7c3643bc4d37e0b72f4e2a
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#413477}

[Lei Zhang, 2016-08-22 17:14:02]

TBR

[Lei Zhang, 2016-08-22 17:14:05]

The CQ bit was checked by thestig@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-08-22 17:14:39]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[cfroussios, 2016-08-22 17:19:32]

2 points.

1. The incorrect use of the flag exists in both linux implementations, and also
on mac.

2. Anyone affected by this change (it has reached beta) will lose access to
their profile. As I commented in the offending CL, it would be good to get some
clarity on who will be affected first.

[cfroussios, 2016-08-22 17:49:08]

LGTM, with the understanding that if there is someone who distributes beta
chromium with the official flag (shame on them?), users are losing their
profiles.

[Lei Zhang, 2016-08-22 18:00:42]

On 2016/08/22 17:49:08, cfroussios wrote:
> LGTM, with the understanding that if there is someone who distributes beta
> chromium with the official flag (shame on them?), users are losing their
> profiles.

I think there may be a slight misunderstanding regarding what "official" means
exactly.
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!topic/chromium-dev/4F5hM8XMOhQ

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-08-22 18:10:56]

Committed patchset #1 (id:1)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-08-22 18:13:01]

Description was changed from

==========
Fix branding/official build confusion in os_crypt.

TBR=cfroussios@chromium.org
==========

to

==========
Fix branding/official build confusion in os_crypt.

TBR=cfroussios@chromium.org

Committed: https://crrev.com/c0bfd647f33d33086f7c3643bc4d37e0b72f4e2a
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#413477}
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-08-22 18:13:02]

Patchset 1 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/c0bfd647f33d33086f7c3643bc4d37e0b72f4e2a
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#413477}

[cfroussios, 2016-08-23 09:05:19]

On 2016/08/22 18:00:42, Lei Zhang wrote:
> On 2016/08/22 17:49:08, cfroussios wrote:
> > LGTM, with the understanding that if there is someone who distributes beta
> > chromium with the official flag (shame on them?), users are losing their
> > profiles.
> 
> I think there may be a slight misunderstanding regarding what "official" means
> exactly.
>
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!topic/chromium-dev/4F5hM8XMOhQ

I see. I did indeed misunderstand what official means. However, this makes
things worse. If is_official is for optimisations, then there is no reason why
there wouldn't be optimised chromium builds, which stored their key as "chrome".
Now we've made them lose their encryption key.

At the very least, we must merge this into M53. Otherwise, stable M53 will
create a lot of false "Chrome" keys, and stable M54 will lose them.

If we'd rather not break the profiles of our beta users, then it might be better
instead to make Chromium copy keys that are branded as "Chrome". It might be
also necessary to do it the other way around too, even though I think Google
Chrome should be optimised.

[Lei Zhang, 2016-08-23 17:08:23]

On 2016/08/23 09:05:19, cfroussios wrote:
> I see. I did indeed misunderstand what official means. However, this makes
> things worse. If is_official is for optimisations, then there is no reason why
> there wouldn't be optimised chromium builds, which stored their key as
"chrome".
> Now we've made them lose their encryption key.
> 
> At the very least, we must merge this into M53. Otherwise, stable M53 will
> create a lot of false "Chrome" keys, and stable M54 will lose them.
> 
> If we'd rather not break the profiles of our beta users, then it might be
better
> instead to make Chromium copy keys that are branded as "Chrome". It might be
> also necessary to do it the other way around too, even though I think Google
> Chrome should be optimised.

Yes, please file a bug and request a M53 merge.