- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 09 Feb 2010 09:49:27 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7744 --- Comment #19 from Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> 2010-02-09 09:49:26 --- (In reply to comment #16) > (In reply to comment #15) > > > After all, we just heard from the editor (see > > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Feb/0164.html) that readers > > > do not follow hyperlinks, so why treat this different from other cases? > > > > We shouldn't. I'd be more than happy to move this text back into the spec, as > > it was when I wrote it and before members of the working group asked for it to > > be put into a separate spec. > > How about leaving it where it is, and just adding the clarification? > draft-abarth-mime-sniff makes sniffing optional, but it would not be accurate to say following MIMESNIFF is optional. draft-abarth-mime-sniff-04 says: WARNING! Whenever possible, user agents SHOULD NOT employ a content sniffing algorithm. However, if a user agent does employ a content sniffing algorithm, the user agent SHOULD use the algorithm in this document because using a different content sniffing algorithm than servers expect causes security problems. For example, if a server believes that the client will treat a contributed file as an image (and thus treat it as benign), but a user agent believes the content to be HTML (and thus privileged to execute any scripts contained therein), an attacker might be able to steal the user's authentication credentials and mount other cross-site scripting attacks. In other words, it recommends that UAs should not sniff, but if they do, they should use this specific algorithm, not any others. HTML5 does not want that set of recommendations (either don't sniff, or if you do, use this algorithm) to be optional, though specifically choosing the sniffing side of that fork is optional. I think the only way to convey this accurately would be to duplicate the whole paragraph I just quoted, and even that might not be enough context without duplicating the whole MIMESNIFF introduction. I don't think that would be an improvement. (PS even though implementors don't always follow references, in this case there is no way to implement the required behavior at all without reading the referenced document.) -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 9 February 2010 09:49:28 UTC