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

Re: XHR without user credentials

From: Tyler Close <tyler.close@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 09:38:47 -0700
Message-ID: <5691356f0906090938v5f86b7favfedf1181e5bc287b@mail.gmail.com>
To: Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>
Cc: "Mark S. Miller" <erights@google.com>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 9:29 AM, Adam Barth<w3c@adambarth.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 9:19 AM, Tyler Close<tyler.close@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 12:22 AM, Adam Barth<w3c@adambarth.com> wrote:
>>> Please send "Origin: null" in these cases.  The problem with omitting
>>> the origin header is that the server can't tell if the request comes
>>> from a legacy client or if the header was removed in transit.
>>
>> For the GuestXMLHttpRequest scenario, why should the server
>> distinguish between these two cases?
>
> In one case, the request is coming from the non-guest part of the page
> in a legacy browser.

And so isn't using GuestXMLHttpRequest.

>  In the other case, the request is coming from
> the guest part of the page in a supporting browser.

And so is using GuestXMLHttpRequest.

>  Isn't the whole
> point of this feature to be able to distinguish guest and non-guest?

So requests from XMLHttpRequest have an Origin header, and requests
from GuestXMLHttpRequest don't. The server should treat requests
coming from GuestXMLHttpRequest as bits arriving from an unknown
client (ie: a "guest"), and so only authorize them based on
information explicitly included in the request.

--Tyler

-- 
"Waterken News: Capability security on the Web"
http://waterken.sourceforge.net/recent.html
Received on Tuesday, 9 June 2009 16:39:19 GMT

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