- From: Zhiheng Wang <zhihengw@google.com>
- Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 11:02:01 -0700
- To: Nic Jansma <Nic.Jansma@microsoft.com>
- Cc: Tony Gentilcore <tonyg@google.com>, Sigbjørn Vik <sigbjorn@opera.com>, public-web-perf <public-web-perf@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <BANLkTint+Sd6USCgxj8GNz-RCi6COJEHiQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 10:33 AM, Nic Jansma <Nic.Jansma@microsoft.com>wrote: > The problem with navigationStart is that it is logically equivalent to, if > not exactly the same as, redirectStart for redirected navigations. > > Since we've decided that redirectStart should be protected by SOP, we > should apply the same SOP to navigationStart (in the case of redirected > navigations). > > Otherwise, if we provided navigationStart in a cross-origin redirected > navigation, combined with the not-SOP-protected fetchStart, we've > essentially given a backdoor to redirectStart(=navigationStart) and > redirectEnd(=fetchStart). > A determined one can already estimate navigationStart with other technique right now so we are not leaking additional info by exposing it. In fact, if we hide navigationStart in the cross-origin case, it is a good indication that there is a redirect involve even if we zero out redirectStart/End/Count. > > Note: Zeroing out navigationStart with cross-origin redirections is not > captured in the Processing Model step 16.a. Zhiheng, would you be able to > update the spec? > yes, once we come to the conclusion of this question. :-) thanks, Zhiheng > > - Nic > > -----Original Message----- > From: public-web-perf-request@w3.org [mailto: > public-web-perf-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Tony Gentilcore > Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2011 9:35 AM > To: Sigbjørn Vik > Cc: public-web-perf > Subject: Re: [NavigationTiming] navigationStart in Cross-origin redirects > > On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 3:23 AM, Sigbjørn Vik <sigbjorn@opera.com> wrote: > > On Mon, 04 Apr 2011 19:37:50 +0200, Zhiheng Wang <zhihengw@google.com> > > wrote: > > > >> Meanwhile, by timing iframe loading time and other techniques, a > >> malicious page can already estimate the time it takes to load a page > >> including HTTP redirects so exposing navigationStart doesn't make it > >> worse in terms of user privacy > >> > >> [4]< > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-perf/2010Oct/0066.html>. > >> So > >> I would propose > >> to lift the SOP constraint on navigationStart in case of redirect. > >> > >> Thoughts and comments? > > > > I cannot immediately think of any reasons we have to block > > navigationStart, so should be fine with me. > > +1 > > The initial Chrome implementation didn't block navigationStart for cross > origin redirects and the internal security/privacy review was okay with > that. I'm interested to hear whether IE and FF are comfortable exposing it > in this case. > > > > >> On a related note, I can't think of a real-life example where > >> domain A redirects to domain B while exposing the redirect time and > >> count on domain A is harmful, given that only HTTP redirects are > considered here. > >> Any one can provide a case for it? We should include it in the spec. > > > > Many sites will redirect a visitor differently depending on the user > > being logged in/having a cookie or not. There might be one extra > > redirection step to set a cookie, even before a site redirects a > > visitor to the final destination. The presence of the extra > > redirection step will leak information about a user's history. Exact > > redirect timings will also reveal if any DNS information is cached. > > > > -- > > Sigbjørn Vik > > Quality Assurance > > Opera Software > > > > > > >
Received on Tuesday, 5 April 2011 18:02:27 UTC