Re: [whatwg/fetch] Add usage advice for Sec- (PR #1818)

martinthomson left a comment (whatwg/fetch#1818)

There will always be judgment involved.  Our discussion about the proposed `Sec-`-prefixed fields for storage access headers highlights that.  But the meaning of those words is clear: if the server depends on the value coming from the browser because it is making a decision that might have unwanted consequences if something other than a browser didn't produce it -- which also implies that there are credentials or something else in the request that is relevant to that decision and that also could only possible come from a browser -- then we have a reason to apply the prefix.

Is there an alternative set of criteria that you would have apply in deciding when `Sec-` applies?

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/whatwg/fetch/pull/1818#issuecomment-2826541732
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <whatwg/fetch/pull/1818/c2826541732@github.com>