- From: <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>
- Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2012 12:17:57 +0000
- To: <robin@berjon.com>
- CC: <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>, <richt@opera.com>, <public-device-apis@w3.org>
+1, also indication of any threats and assumptions that the reader should be aware of. regards, Frederick Frederick Hirsch Nokia On Aug 6, 2012, at 6:48 AM, ext Robin Berjon robin@berjon.com wrote: > On Aug 3, 2012, at 20:00 , Rich Tibbett wrote: >> I'm not a huge fan of Individual Security and Privacy Consideration sections in specs. It's Important to tackle these things by design and include security as part of the defined algorithms. Having said that, if the group thinks this is a good idea then we can add something along those lines. > > There are two aspects to take into account here. One is designing security right into the technology's model and not bolting it on in a separate section (that might not get implemented). The other is catering to readers who might not give a rat's hind about discovery in JS but who want to do a security review of the spec. Those are the people for whom a dedicate security section can be useful. I think it can be a short affair, perhaps a couple paragraphs stating that security blah can be found in sections foo. > > -- > Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon > >
Received on Monday, 6 August 2012 12:19:05 UTC