Re: Additional security and privacy considerations?

Thomas Roessler wrote:
> <add>
>
> Persistent permissions can lead to privacy leaks due to a number of 
> effects:  Users are known to sometimes grant permissions erroneously 
> and unintentionally.  Domain names change owner, business practices 
> change, web sites are subverted.  In all of these scenarios, the 
> ability to easily revoke permissions can be critical to the user's 
> safety and privacy; likewise, it becomes critical for users to 
> understand what data are revealed during their ongoing interaction 
> with Web applications.  Therefore, user agents must take steps to 
> limit the risk of inadvertent location disclosure, even after 
> permission to share location has been granted by the user:
>
>
> 1. User agents must inform the user when Web applications acquire 
> location information based on a consent granted previously.
>
>   Example: A user agent shows a specific icon in the status bar when 
> the web application that the user currently interacts with has 
> acquired location information.
>
> 2. When location information is passed to a web application, a user 
> interface for revoking the relevant permissions must be easily and 
> obviously available.
>
>   Example: By clicking on a status bar indicator for location 
> information, the user gets access to a dialogue that permits 
> revocation of the location authorization.
>
> 3. User agents should limit the scope of authorizations in time by 
> asking for re-authorization in certain intervals.  As a general 
> guideline, authorizations related to location information should not 
> be considered valid for more than one week. Often, a shorter time will 
> be appropriate.
>
> </add>
Thomas,

I think these are very good proposals for privacy protection on the UI 
level.
I personally think we should leave out specific examples of *how* this 
could be implemented in user agents, that should be left to the 
creativity of the implementors.

I also agree with hixie that the "must"s in the first two requirements 
should be "should"s.

Lars Erik

Received on Monday, 18 May 2009 21:34:13 UTC