SIP addresses containing "911" shouldn't be considered emergency calls
This change updates isEmergencyNumberInternal() to always return false if
you pass in a SIP address, since the concept of "emergency numbers" is
only meaningful for calls placed over the cell network.
Previously we *did* try to compare SIP addresses against the list of known
emergency numbers, which caused bad behavior with SIP addresses that even
contained "911"/"112"/etc as a substring (since we were filtering out
non-dialable characters before doing the comparison!)
TESTED:
- Before this change, calls to "abc911def@example.com" or
"911abcdef@example.com" were incorrectly detected as emergency
numbers, and fail.
- After this change, SIP addresses like "abc911def@example.com" and
"911abcdef@example.com" work fine.
- Also, confirmed that this change doesn't break the restriction that
3rd party apps shouldn't be able to make emergency calls.
Specifically, I fired off ACTION_CALL intents (using the CallDialTest
activity) for a bunch of numbers *similar* to emergency numbers, and
confirmed that none of them actually resulted in an emergency call
being placed.
The specific ACTION_CALL intents I tested were:
"911" ==> Didn't place the call; brought up dialer instead
"tel:911" ==> Didn't place the call; brought up dialer instead
"911@foo" ==> Tried to start a SIP call (which failed)
"911%40foo" ==> Tried to start a SIP call (which failed)
"tel:911@foo" ==> Tried to start a SIP call (which failed)
"tel:911%40foo" ==> Tried to start a SIP call (which failed)
"911@example.com" ==> Tried to start a SIP call (which failed)
"sip:911" ==> Didn't place the call; brought up dialer instead
"sip:911@foo" ==> Tried to start a SIP call (which failed)
"sip:911%40foo" ==> Tried to start a SIP call (which failed)
Bug: 5515452
Change-Id: I6f9f8690b08564c53c7a76f480654477b475d94d
1 file changed