- From: Mike West <mkwst@google.com>
- Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2014 15:42:52 +0100
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Cc: Deian Stefan <deian@cs.stanford.edu>, WebApps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>, WebAppSec WG <public-webappsec@w3.org>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Message-ID: <CAKXHy=f5bX0HwMSZJUzCQ53u-srz82A3O75Sz7m9DhB+A3NApw@mail.gmail.com>
The CSP spec should just delegate to HTML here. If/when HTML defines sandboxing with regard to Workers, CSP will just start using those hooks. I'd agree, for example, that it does appear that sandboxing a worker into a unique origin could be interesting. It's not clear to me whether any of the other flags would be useful, though. Ian, WDYT? -mike -- Mike West <mkwst@google.com> Google+: https://mkw.st/+, Twitter: @mikewest, Cell: +49 162 10 255 91 Google Germany GmbH, Dienerstrasse 12, 80331 München, Germany Registergericht und -nummer: Hamburg, HRB 86891 Sitz der Gesellschaft: Hamburg Geschäftsführer: Graham Law, Christine Elizabeth Flores (Sorry; I'm legally required to add this exciting detail to emails. Bleh.) On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 9:45 AM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 5:10 AM, Deian Stefan <deian@cs.stanford.edu> > wrote: > > I am implementing CSP for Workers in Firefox, but like to get a > > clarification on workers and the sandbox flag. Currently, a Worker can > > inherit or be accompanied by a CSP header. As written, the implications > > of the sandbox directive on the Worker context is not clear. > > > > [Following up on https://github.com/w3c/webappsec/issues/69] > > > > Arguably most of the sandbox flags don't make sense for Workers, but the > > empty directive (i.e., just sandbox) and sandbox allow-same-origin can > > have reasonable semantics. So, if a Worker inherits the CSP from the > > owner document (or parent worker in later specs) or is accompanied by a > > CSP header which has the 'sandbox' directive, should the worker script's > > origin be set to a unique origin? Or should we just ignore (and > > appropriately warn about) the sandbox flag for Workers and address the > > need for sandboxed Workers separately? > > This would affect what a worker can fetch, what storage it has access > to, and which permissions it has (e.g. can it display a notification). > Might be an interesting way to run untrusted code. > > But if we are going to do something like this Ian would have to define > how the sandbox directives affect a worker environment. > > > -- > https://annevankesteren.nl/ > >
Received on Wednesday, 12 November 2014 14:43:41 UTC