W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2009

Re: ISSUE-83 (digsig should not be read at runtime): Instantiated widget should not be able to read digital signature [Widgets]

From: Arthur Barstow <Art.Barstow@nokia.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2009 07:03:40 -0400
Message-Id: <17F840E0-47C1-4E45-A847-E1A800AC5B85@nokia.com>
Cc: "Hirsch Frederick (Nokia-CIC/Boston)" <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>, Web Applications Working Group WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
To: ext Marcos Caceres <marcosc@opera.com>, "Priestley, Mark, VF-Group" <Mark.Priestley@vodafone.com>
On Apr 9, 2009, at 1:44 PM, ext Marcos Caceres wrote:

>
>
> On 4/9/09 3:56 PM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
>> On Apr 9, 2009, at 9:52 AM, ext Marcos Caceres wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 2:17 PM, Priestley, Mark, VF-Group
>>> <Mark.Priestley@vodafone.com> wrote:
>>>> Hi Art, All,
>>>>
>>>> If there is no use case for accessing this information (I was  
>>>> after why
>>>> you would want to access this information because I think just  
>>>> saying it
>>>> might be interesting to do so isn't justification enough), then  
>>>> I think
>>>> my original proposal holds - make the signature files  
>>>> unavailable to the
>>>> widget at runtime.
>>>>
>>>> For clarification I was not suggesting that an API should be  
>>>> added to
>>>> the DigSig spec but rather that some of the information could be  
>>>> exposed
>>>> via an API defined in the APIs and Events spec. But I don't  
>>>> think this
>>>> is necessary or worth the additional specification effort.
>>>
>>>
>>> FWIW, I agree with Mark.
>>
>> Please propose text that will address your concerns.
>
> In the P&C spec, I would add something like:
>
> "A user agent MUST make the digital signature available only to
> implementations of the [Widgets-DigSig] specification.

I don't understand why we would want to create this type for a P&C UA.


> A user agent MUST
> NOT allow read access to any digital signature in the widget  
> package at
> runtime.

I think this conflates requirements for a P&C UA with the  
requirements for Widget [Runtime] UA. As such, I disagree with what  
you are trying to prescribe here and think the specs should remain  
silent on this (or perhaps defer this to a definition of a Widgets UA  
runtime model).

I still cannot understand why you want to preclude a widget from  
being able to access *all* of its resources. Perhaps it would be  
helpful if you would elaborate on the risk(s) you are trying to  
mitigate.

-Regards, Art Barstow


> In other words, a user agent MUST NOT allow a start file, or
> any other file or resource inside or outside the context of the widget
> (e.g., a script or stylesheet), or API, or feature, to read any  
> digital
> signature file within the widget package. At runtime, a user agent  
> MUST
> make it seem as if digital signatures do not exist in the widget  
> package
> by, for example, excluding them from any file listings, and not  
> allowing
> them to be accessed via a URI."
>
> That's just some quick draft text, please feel free to change, add, or
> whatever.
Received on Monday, 13 April 2009 11:04:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:31 GMT