- From: Anssi Kostiainen <notifications@github.com>
- Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2015 07:02:34 -0700
- To: w3c/manifest <manifest@noreply.github.com>
- Message-ID: <w3c/manifest/issues/360/92366973@github.com>
@benfrancis Let me try to rephrase your proposal in terms of HTTP requests and responses. Some details omitted for brevity. Correct any misinterpretations. Assumptions made for the currently unspecified `manifest-src` directive: * `manifest-src *` permits cross-origin manifest fetch by default (in addition cross-origin manifest fetch response must have proper `Access-Control-Allow-Origin` header set) * `manifest-src 'self'` enforces same-origin manifest fetch * `manifest-src real-cdn.com` allows cross-origin manifests from real-cdn.com only Example: evil-cdn.com hosts manifest.json. foo.com indicates it trusts real-cdn.com only to deliver a valid manifest. The UA considers manifest.json served from evil-cdn.com invalid since it violates foo.com's manifest-src directive. Request foo.com: ``` GET / HTTP/1.1 Host: foo.com Accept: */* ``` Response: ``` HTTP/1.1 200 OK Content-Type: text/html Content-Security-Policy: manifest-src real-cdn.com <html> <head> <title>foo.com</title> <link rel="manifest" href="http://evil-cdn.com/manifest.json"> </head> <body> </body> </html> ``` Fetch of http://evil-cdn.com/manifest.json fails due to manifest-src violation, response would have been: ``` HTTP/1.1 200 OK Access-Control-Allow-Origin: http://foo.com Content-Type: application/manifest+json { "start_url": "http://foo.com/start.html" ... } ``` @benfrancis Did I get your proposal right? --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/w3c/manifest/issues/360#issuecomment-92366973
Received on Monday, 13 April 2015 14:03:04 UTC