- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 23:50:59 +0100
- To: "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@yahoo-inc.com>
- Cc: "WAF WG (public)" <public-appformats@w3.org>
On Tue, 22 Jan 2008 23:14:26 +0100, Mark Nottingham <mnot@yahoo-inc.com> wrote: > On 22/01/2008, at 8:59 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: >> On Tue, 22 Jan 2008 04:56:52 +0100, Mark Nottingham <mnot@yahoo-inc.com >>> [...] Separate from the server-side vs. client-side policy enforcement >>> issue (which I'm not bringing up here explicitly, since it's an open >>> issue AFAICT, although the WG doesn't link to its issues list from its >>> home page), the Working Group needs to motivate the decision to have >>> access control policy only apply on a per-resource basis, rather than >>> per resource tree, or site-wide. >> >> It's not an open issue. > > Let's have one, then. The W3C has already solved the problem of site- > wide metadata once, and there should be *some* reason for taking a > different path this time. Actually, we have an open issue on this one and it's proposed for closing as we have per resource policy requirement. >>> Overall, this approach doesn't seem well-integrated into the Web, or >>> even friendly to it; it's more of a hack, which is puzzling, since it >>> requires clients to change anyway. >> >> I don't really understand this. Changing clients is cheap compared to >> changing all the servers out there. > > Spoken like a true browser vendor. The thing is, it's not necessary to > change all of the servers; anyone who's sufficiently motivated to > publish cross-site data can get their server updated, modified, or move > to a new one easily. OTOH they have *no* power to update their users' > browsers (unless they're in an especially iron-fisted enterprise IT > environment, and even then...). We need updates of browsers anyway. Otherwise cross-site XMLHttpRequest will not work. Also, I still don't understand your comment correctly. >> Multi-user hosts already need filtering. Otherwise they could simply >> load a page from the same domain with a different path in an <iframe> >> or something and do the request from there. The security model of the >> Web is based around domains. How unfortunate or fortunate that may be. > > Yes; it's still worth pointing this out for the uninitiated. Can you propose some text? -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/> <http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Tuesday, 22 January 2008 22:47:27 UTC