W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-media-capture@w3.org > December 2015

Re: Issue #268: Iframe sandboxing options for gUM

From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 5 Dec 2015 20:46:30 +1100
Message-ID: <CABkgnnW+_eMM1vehxNcV4dwky_qCLvJAnjL3gXVCPzkFBs568w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
Cc: "public-media-capture@w3.org" <public-media-capture@w3.org>
Opened: https://github.com/w3c/permissions/issues/55

On 5 December 2015 at 20:36, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5 December 2015 at 02:40, Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> wrote:
>> Would choosing double-keyed permission mean that if an iframe appears in
>> 7 different contexts, the permissions will have to be stored 7 different
>> times?
> Yes, and showing the iframe as a top-level context would produce the 8th.
>> Note that permission keying affects whether we're able to unify our
>> permissions model with the Permissions API model - that model doesn't
>> appear to consider iframes separately at all at the moment.
> Yes, and I think that's a very relevant question to raise over there,
> and I will do that right now.  If an origin makes a query of the
> Permissions API with the expectation that the answer is the same no
> matter how it is framed, it might be surprised.  At a minimum, the API
> should establish expectations about what to expect here.  (I'm not
> sure that it's possible to *see* what the top-level browsing context
> is from an iframe.)
Received on Saturday, 5 December 2015 09:46:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Saturday, 5 December 2015 09:46:59 UTC