Re: [slightlyoff/ServiceWorker] Why does CacheStorage have [SecureContext] but not Cache (#941)

That does look a bit inconsistent indeed. I wonder what would be preferred though with regard to SecureContext on interfaces. For security it doesn't really matter if these interfaces have [SecureContext] or not, as the only way to get access to instances that do things is via methods that are SecureContext only. But maybe for consistency and/or feature detection it might make sense to hide all the interfaces as well? Not sure. Similarly ServiceWorker and ServiceWorkerRegistration currently don't have [SecureContext] but ServiceWorkerContainer does...

---
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/slightlyoff/ServiceWorker/issues/941#issuecomment-237639628