W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > January to March 2010

Re: [UMP] Server opt-in

From: Tyler Close <tyler.close@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2010 14:19:44 -0800
Message-ID: <5691356f1001121419v6f1986a4y8430c165e52341f8@mail.gmail.com>
To: Adam Barth <abarth@webkit.org>
Cc: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
I believe all three protocols attach the same semantics to the
"Access-Control-Allow-Origin: *" response header sent in response to a
GET or POST request. Unless you know of a significant difference in
the semantics, breaking compatibility seems unwarranted.

--Tyler

On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 12:54 PM, Adam Barth <abarth@webkit.org> wrote:
> In the current draft of UMP, the client can opt-in to UMP by choosing
> to use the UniformMessaging API, but the server is unable to force
> clients to use UMP because the way the server opts into the protocol
> is by returning the Access-Control-Allow-Origin header.
> Unfortunately, when the server returns the Access-Control-Allow-Origin
> header, the server also opts into the CORS and XDomainRequest
> protocols.  The server operator might be reticent to opt into these
> protocols if he or she is worried about ambient authority.
>
> I recommend using a new header, like "Allow-Uniform-Messages: level-1"
> so that servers can opt into UMP specifically.
>
> Adam
>



-- 
"Waterken News: Capability security on the Web"
http://waterken.sourceforge.net/recent.html
Received on Tuesday, 12 January 2010 22:20:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:36 GMT