Re: Security Evaluation Request

It would unless they use content editable.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Apr 8, 2016, at 1:23 PM, Gunderson, Jon R <jongund@illinois.edu> wrote:
> 
> I assume these custom password controls will have a label (e.g. using the LABEL element or other labeling technique)  of “Password”, so people will know the control is a password control without using the role=password. 
>  
> Isn’t having a role=password at least providing a means to identify the custom password control in a way that supports internationalization, and reducing any ambiguity of the purpose and caution an assistive technology user should take when interacting with the control?
>  
> Jon
>  
>  
> From: James Nurthen [mailto:james.nurthen@oracle.com] 
> Sent: Friday, April 08, 2016 12:57 PM
> To: John Foliot <john.foliot@deque.com>; 'Richard Schwerdtfeger' <richschwer@gmail.com>
> Cc: public-aria@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Security Evaluation Request
>  
> John,
> My issue with this whole "evil author" thing is that an "evil author" can do exactly what you are talking about today without the need for a password role. Why are we getting hung up on this?
> Regards,
> James
> 
> On 4/8/2016 10:54 AM, John Foliot wrote:
> Hi all,
>  
> Outside of SVG, are there any other W3C mark-up languages where this is a problem?
> Is the lack of ability to create a password field in SVG the primary driver of this request/need today?
> Could the “native semantic” issue (and related security/privacy concerns) be dealt with inside of the SVG spec instead?
>  
> One of my ongoing concerns is with giving an author (any author, from IBM or Oracle to Dr. Evil and his Merry Band of Tricksters) a carte-blanche ability to imply some sense of security and privacy on a custom, author-supplied widget. Saying we can't impose behavior on a custom control via ARIA is one thing, turning around and giving authors the ability to be untruthful about it is a whole other kettle of fish, and I am troubled that we may not be looking at how this proposed attribute might be used maliciously, with the express attempt to deceive.
>  
> It is my hope that this question also be contemplated in a security review.
>  
> JF
> ​-- 
> John Foliot
> Principal Accessibility Strategist
> Austin, TX
>  
> Deque Systems Inc.
> 2121 Cooperative Way, Suite 210,  
> Herndon, VA 20171-5344
> Office: 703-225-0380 
> john.foliot@deque.com
>  
> Advancing the mission of digital accessibility and inclusion
>  
>  
>  
> From: Richard Schwerdtfeger [mailto:richschwer@gmail.com] 
> Sent: Friday, April 8, 2016 11:44 AM
> To: James Nurthen <james.nurthen@oracle.com>
> Cc: public-aria@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Security Evaluation Request
>  
> You cannot make an accessible password field in SVG without it.  
>  
> On Apr 8, 2016, at 11:40 AM, James Nurthen <james.nurthen@oracle.com> wrote:
>  
>  
> 
> On 4/8/2016 9:37 AM, Gervase Markham wrote:
> On 08/04/16 17:22, Richard Schwerdtfeger wrote:
> Companies do not use standard HTML markup when they feel it does not
> meet their needs. It really does not have anything to do with whether
> the markup is semantically correct. This is happening now and we
> don’t even have a password role. Companies that must do this for
> business reasons need a way to make it accessible.
> They have a way to make it accessible - use a proper password field. So
> what you are asking for is actually a second way to make it accessible.
> What happens if some company then comes forward and says they can't use
> your solution because for security reasons they aren't allowed to label
> the field "password" in any way. What do you do then? Invent an alias
> and call it "type='mrblobby'"?
>  
> There is only a certain distance one should go to accommodate ridiculous
> corporate requests. "We want to do passwords but don't want to use
> password fields" is a user-hostile request (both for users requiring
> accessibility technology and other users) and should be treated as such.
> How can someone create a password field in SVG without this?
> 
> Regards,
> James
> 
> 
> 
>  
> The bigger issue is that passwords as a technology have long outlived
> their usefulness. The growing world aging population has issues
> remembering passwords for all the sites they have to gain access to
> so they often use a simple, short, easy to remember password across
> all the sites creating a security issue. To this end even HTML’s
> password is a security risk as it is much easier to hack. This can
> result in identity theft and a whole litany of issues. Captchas are
> also a huge problem for aging users.
> This may be so; but encouraging people to use non-password fields for
> passwords and so avoiding all the software people are using to help them
> manage the password problem (which does make things better) doesn't help.
>  
> Gerv
>  
>  
> -- 
> Regards, James
> <oracle_sig_logo.gif>
> James Nurthen | Principal Engineer, Accessibility
> Phone: +1 650 506 6781 | Mobile: +1 415 987 1918 | Video: james.nurthen@oracle.com 
> Oracle Corporate Architecture
> 500 Oracle Parkway | Redwood Cty, CA 94065 
> <green-for-email-sig_0.gif> Oracle is committed to developing practices and products that help protect the environment
>  
>  
> -- 
> Regards, James
> <image001.gif>
> James Nurthen | Principal Engineer, Accessibility
> Phone: +1 650 506 6781 | Mobile: +1 415 987 1918 | Video: james.nurthen@oracle.com 
> Oracle Corporate Architecture
> 500 Oracle Parkway | Redwood Cty, CA 94065 
> <image002.gif>Oracle is committed to developing practices and products that help protect the environment