- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Sat, 05 Dec 2009 23:06:40 -0800
- To: "sird@rckc.at" <sird@rckc.at>
- Cc: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, public-web-security@w3.org
Received on Sunday, 6 December 2009 07:07:14 UTC
On Dec 5, 2009, at 10:58 PM, sird@rckc.at wrote: > iirc sandboxed iframes cant frame. > My reading of the spec (confirmed by Hixie) is that sandboxed iframes can frame - perhaps they should not be able to. > in any case sandbox iframes are a joke unless you use data URIs.. > that should be cross origin anyway > Not setting the allow-same-origin flag makes them about as restricted as using a data: URI. - Maciej > >> On Dec 6, 2009 2:55 PM, "Maciej Stachowiak" <mjs@apple.com> wrote: >> >> On Dec 5, 2009, at 10:27 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote: > > I think >> the attack is that you can injec... >> >> OK, I thought of a possible real vulnerability. A trusted host page >> on the site wants to embed some untrusted user-generated content >> with the ability to modify it, so it embeds it, hosted from its own >> server, using <iframe sandbox="allow-same-origin">. This should >> prevent scripting and plugins, so in theory it seems safe. But the >> untrusted content could embed a further iframe with the seamless >> flag, embedding an arbitrary document from the hosting service. It >> can then use CSS selectors to probe for data in that document. >> >> Regards, >> Maciej >> >
Received on Sunday, 6 December 2009 07:07:14 UTC