- From: Joel Weinberger <jww@chromium.org>
- Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 10:22:49 -0700
- To: Yoav Weiss <yoav@yoav.ws>
- Cc: Neil Matatall <neilm@twitter.com>, Евнгений Яременко <w3techplayground@gmail.com>, "public-webappsec@w3.org" <public-webappsec@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAHQV2KmC=CFYFtUBHkXsB4KN4XyxF0kTf_Fkt0URbZqdMeDysg@mail.gmail.com>
I'm not particularly against, hashes, but I'm naturally hesitant to add more constructs to CSP, especially since the use of nonces seem to completely overlap with the use cases for hashes. I think the concern about nonce abuse as Yoav pointed out are valid concerns, but I'd be hesitant to add a new construct just to cover that particular concern. Put differently, I don't see any dramatically different uses for hashes from nonces. --Joel On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 4:09 AM, Yoav Weiss <yoav@yoav.ws> wrote: > +1 for discussing it further. > > The advantages I see: > * The author is authorizing a *specific* script/style and can do so using > static configuration > - No need for a dynamic backend that changes the nonce for each request.. > - This can simplify deployment, resulting in more people using it > * I'm afraid of authors abusing nonces, sending the same nonce over and > over as means to "bypass" CSP > - Offering an alternative to nonce can reduce that risk > > The complications I can think of: > * Make sure that either hashes don't break with small white-spaces > removals, text encoding changes, etc. > - An alternative is tools that can give authors the resulting hash for a > specific script/style. (e.g. inside the Web inspector tools). That may be > more fragile, though. > > All in all, I think hashes can make it easier for "copy&paste" authors to > integrate CSP. They can also make deployment of third party scripts easier. > > > On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 8:00 AM, Neil Matatall <neilm@twitter.com> wrote: > >> This is the script-hash proposal. I would love it if we discussed this >> more as it has numerous benefits over a nonce as well as complications :) >> On Jun 15, 2013 1:11 AM, "Евнгений Яременко" <w3techplayground@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Is it possible to verify(whitelist) inline script block via checksum of >>> its logic(uniform) as alternative to "Nonce"? ie send checksum of the >>> allowed script via header and if inlined script checksum is the same it's >>> allowed to execute. >>> >> >
Received on Monday, 17 June 2013 17:23:48 UTC