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

Re: Sandboxed iframes (was Re: Seamless iframes + CSS3 selectors = bad idea)

From: Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 17:48:56 -0800
Message-ID: <7789133a1001191748o72ed6caas616af40840d25a5c@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Cc: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, "sird@rckc.at" <sird@rckc.at>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, gaz Heyes <gazheyes@gmail.com>, public-web-security@w3.org
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 5:05 PM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:
> On Sun, 6 Dec 2009, Adam Barth wrote:
>> In some sense, a site needs to vet all URLs for javascript URLs, but
>> this behavior means that every time you see "javascript:" in an XSS
>> filter, they're probably insecure unless you also see "data:" right next
>> door.
> Any system relying on blacklisting URLs or schemes is just asking for
> trouble. You simply cannot do a truly secure filtering mechanism with
> anything but a pure whitelisting mechanism, where _everything_ is
> whitelisted, including URL schemes.

We've had this argument a couple of times.  I worry that we're relying
too much on authors using strong XSS filters.  I don't have any solid
data about how often folks use blacklist-based XSS filters.
Anecdotally, I've certainly seen them in the wild.

Received on Wednesday, 20 January 2010 01:49:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:26:17 UTC