- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Fri, 03 Oct 2008 14:29:50 +0200
- To: "Jonas Sicking" <jonas@sicking.cc>, "Webapps WG" <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Thu, 02 Oct 2008 01:24:34 +0200, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote: > I think it would be good if we more explicitly could define the two, > with cookies vs. without cookies, security modes for Access-Control. > > Right now the spec talks about the with-credentials flag either being > true or false, however it doesn't really receive as much attention as > for example simple vs. preflighted requests. That's because simple vs. preflight requests affect a lot of things. Whether or not cookies are included doesn't really. > Second, it would allow implementations such as Microsofts XDR (if they > end up supporting Access-Control) to more precisely talk about which > parts of the spec they use. As far as I can tell they can be really precise on that already. XDomainRequest "invokes" cross-site access request with a request URL as given, request method as given (though can only be GET or POST), request headers as given (though only Content-Type can be set, and only to a restricted list of values as I understand it), request entity body as given, source for source origin as how IE determines the origin for XDomainRequest, a credentials flag set to false, a force preflight flag set to false. The logical result of this is that with XDomainRequest not everything of Access Control is exposed, but that's not a problem. That's perfectly fine and allowed by the Access Control specification. I actually posted about this long ago and never received any feedback so I assumed it was fine: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2008JulSep/0035.html (Note that we did change the header name servers have to return since that message.) > One way to talk about this is as requests for public versus private > resources. This is definitely something we should talk about in the > Security Considerations section (which in general seems to be missing a > part about servers). We should also talk about it in the Processing > Model section. Yeah, some clarifications around the credentials flag would be appropriate. > Let me know what you think. I don't think it's needed. -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/> <http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Friday, 3 October 2008 12:30:35 UTC