- From: Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>
- Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 13:24:14 -0800
- To: Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- CC: "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
What exactly are we trying to prevent? Maciej seemed to be pushing on the XSS attack as a problem - and said that this is tied to scripting outside the browser's controls. OK - I can accept that. Then you should block any file format - regardless of how it is implemented - that allows such things. In the same vein, any format - regardless of how it is implemented - should be allowed. So if we say (for example) that TIFF images don't have XSS issues - then I would put forth that they be allowed in sandboxed content REGARDLESS of whether they are implemented natively or via plugin. Same thing with the other side of that coin. If a certain type of video format - say QuickTime - does allow such things, they it should be forbidden REGARDLESS of how the particular UA implements it. Wouldn't you agree?? Leonard -----Original Message----- From: Adam Barth [mailto:w3c@adambarth.com] Sent: Monday, January 25, 2010 5:55 AM To: Maciej Stachowiak Cc: Leonard Rosenthol; public-html@w3.org Subject: Re: What defines a "plugin"? WRT sandboxing? On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 4:49 AM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote: > On Jan 24, 2010, at 8:45 PM, Adam Barth wrote: >> The problem with that approach is that authors will have a difficult >> time predicting how user agents will behave. Perhaps a more >> operational definition is in order? We could say that sandboxed >> content will not be able to use the <object> or <embed> elements >> (including the implied versions that can be created via frames). > > You would also want to banish <applent> in that case. Are we ok with sandboxed content embedding unusual things via <img>, <video> or <audio> if the browser supports that? Safari supports PDF in the <img> element, and also as a CSS background image. Those seem fine. Of course, a user agent could do something insane with <img>, <video>, or <audio>, but then that user agent would likely introduce security vulnerabilities into web sites (such as forums) that let users embed <img> elements with (almost!) arbitrary src attributes. Adam
Received on Monday, 25 January 2010 21:24:47 UTC