Account Options

  1. Sign in
The old Google Groups will be going away soon.
Switch to the new Google Groups.
Google Groups Home
« Groups Home
mozilla.dev.security
+ new post
About this group
Subscribe to this group
This is a Usenet group - learn more
Message from discussion Content Security Policy - final call for comments
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
Brandon Sterne  
View profile  
 More options Apr 7 2009, 12:22 pm
Newsgroups: mozilla.dev.security
From: Brandon Sterne <bste...@mozilla.com>
Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2009 09:22:19 -0700
Local: Tues, Apr 7 2009 12:22 pm
Subject: Re: Content Security Policy - final call for comments
Print | View thread | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author
On 4/6/09 11:36 PM, Daniel Veditz wrote:

> "allow" is not mandatory, but if missing it's assumed to be "allow
> none". If you explicitly specify the whitelisted hosts for each type of
> load you might not need or want a global fallback which could only be
> used to sneak through types you hadn't thought about. Future browser
> features, for instance.

Not according to our proposed spec:
https://wiki.mozilla.org/Security/CSP/Spec#Directives
http://people.mozilla.org/~bsterne/content-security-policy/details.ht...

See comments from me and Sid from yesterday explaining why allow is
required.

I somewhat agree with the spirit of Dan's comment.  If allow is not
specified, then the _effect_ is to allow none, because the policy is
invalid and CSP will fail closed.  However, strictly speaking, we don't
assume allow none if it isn't specified.  We will treat that as invalid
policy, logging an error, and not loading any of the content types.

By falling back to "allow none" when invalid policy is sent, websites
will know right away that their pages are broken because no content,
other than textual elements will load.  This is a more secure option
than failing open and having websites potentially believe their users
are protected.

-Brandon


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy
©2012 Google