- From: <sird@rckc.at>
- Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2009 14:41:21 +0800
- To: Devdatta <dev.akhawe@gmail.com>
- Cc: public-web-security@w3.org
- Message-ID: <8ba534860912062241s3c72f8eai5eba38b7dfdc8a7b@mail.gmail.com>
Oh I just reread Use Cases.. quoting: > An XBL binding allows the document to which it is bound to have full access to the document in which it is defined. To prevent data theft cross-origin<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009OctDec/att-0914/draft.html#cross-origin>XBL usage is therefore prohibited. The uniform messaging policy enables cross-origin<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009OctDec/att-0914/draft.html#cross-origin>XBL bindings. If the user is authorized to use the XBL widget, it is possible to have user-specific cross-origin<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009OctDec/att-0914/draft.html#cross-origin>bindings. [XBL]<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009OctDec/att-0914/draft.html#ref-xbl> So who allows the binding here? a.example.com/mozbind.html or b.example.net/binding.xml Obviously it must be a.example.com (right?) so, now.. a.example.com can "bind" b.example.net bindings.. because a.example.com trusts b.example.net. So this only applies for bindings or also for DOM? Greetz!! -- Eduardo http://www.sirdarckcat.net/ Sent from Hangzhou, 33, China On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 1:09 PM, Devdatta <dev.akhawe@gmail.com> wrote: > My reading of the CORS spec tells me it is just XHR (basically the XHR > object can now do cross origin requests and read the response under > specific conditions). I don't think it removes the same origin > scripting restrictions that you are concerned about. > > Cheers > Devdatta > > 2009/12/6 Eduardo Vela <sirdarckcat@gmail.com>: > > Hi! > > > > I am confused about CORS... CORS is for actually "dropping SOP" on > certain > > conditions? or just a XHR thingy.. > > > > I mean, this means that if: > > > > https://www.example.net/ > > > > completely trusts http://www.example.com/ then http://www.example.com/will > > be able to access the DOM of a frame on https://www.example.net/? > > > > Isn't this dangerous? > > > > If for example.. > > > > www.bankofamerica.com trusts http://www.google.com/ (maybe because of > some > > API or whatever..) and http://www.google.com/ trusts > http://www.youtube.com/ > > and http://www.youtube.com/ trusts http://help.youtube.com/ and then I > find > > a XSS on help.youtube.com, wouldn't I be capable of chaining this trust > > relationships and XSS bankofamerica? > > > > I think that's not what CORS was meant to, but I'm confused since > > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009OctDec/att-0931/draft.html > > > > Says: > > This specification defines an HTTP response header that allows a resource > to > > opt-out of SOP protection for a given HTTP response. > > > > So this only applies for XHR? The abstract seems to say that: > > http://www.w3.org/Security/wiki/CORS but it's not very clear for me.. > > Sorry.. maybe I'm slow hehe can someone tell me if this is only for XHR > or > > applies to all SOP? > > > > Thanks! > > > > Greetings!! > > >
Received on Monday, 7 December 2009 06:42:15 UTC