Re: [Content Security Policy] Proposal to move the debate forward

On 02/01/2011 01:45 AM, Gervase Markham wrote:
> The only difference between your proposal and ours is that because allow
> defaults to 'none', CSP as it stands would require 'allow <something>'
> on every policy, whereas yours does away with that. But I'm not seeing
> that as an enormous simplification.

> (We went backwards and forwards on whether allow should default to
> 'none' or *. I wish we'd written down the arguments on both sides.
> Perhaps Brandon or Lucas can remember some of them. If it defaulted to
> *, then our proposals would be equivalent.)

The case for a default policy of 'none' is that it is more secure, while
the case for default * is that it's more compatible.  In the thread I
started yesterday, "[Content Security Policy] A more modular approach",
I'm advocating switching to a default * policy (and making default-src
optional) so we can reconcile the two models and move forward.

-Brandon

Received on Tuesday, 1 February 2011 17:05:27 UTC