W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > January 2010

Re: What defines a "plugin"? WRT sandboxing?

From: Michael A. Puls II <shadow2531@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2010 09:11:30 -0500
To: "Leonard Rosenthol" <lrosenth@adobe.com>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.u61i1fs01ejg13@sandra-svwliu01>
On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 08:44:31 -0500, Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>  
wrote:

> When defining and implementing sandboxing, is the requirement to disable  
> plugins restricted ONLY to actual technologies implemented by plugins to  
> the browser/UA _OR_ does it really mean content not in a format  
> documented by the HTML5 spec.
>
> For example, Safari (on the Mac) knows how to natively view PDF  
> documents.  If Safari encounters an HTML document with a reference to an  
> embedded PDF (<object> or <embed>) it will currently render that  
> document through its own technology, whereas other browsers will use  
> available plugins to do so.  When that same HTML is now served as  
> sandbox, then clearly the other browsers will stop viewing PDF - but  
> should Safari?
>
> OR consider Adobe AIR which (through WebKit) can act as an HTML5 UA and  
> incorporates native support for Flash.  Does it have to disable Flash,  
> since it isn't using sandbox?
>
> Looking forward to the discussion...

I was wondering about this too.

Also, with Java, what if the browser more or less embeds Java directly and  
doesn't use the NPAPI plug-ins. Is Java still considered a plug-in then in  
the browser?

Or, should we say that "all plug-ins" + "all native things that don't  
support sandbox"?

-- 
Michael
Received on Sunday, 24 January 2010 14:12:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:17:00 GMT