W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webappsec@w3.org > March 2013

Re: webappsec-ISSUE-45 ('top-only'): Is 'top-only' worth preserving? [UI Security]

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2013 14:08:45 +0000
Message-ID: <CADnb78j1G44C=zcj2ALJnVNWuVy=_5AVAy5B3p9cLR2jDbWz7w@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Hill, Brad" <bhill@paypal-inc.com>
Cc: Ian Melven <imelven@mozilla.com>, Tobias Gondrom <tobias.gondrom@gondrom.org>, "public-webappsec@w3.org" <public-webappsec@w3.org>
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 2:03 PM, Hill, Brad <bhill@paypal-inc.com> wrote:
> [Hill, Brad] That's covered in
> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/user-interface-safety/raw-file/0475e30847bf/user-interface-safety.html
> but I would certainly appreciate comments to make the behavior more explicit if you feel such is necessary.

I would expect MUST, not SHOULD. I would also expect that to result
from following a set of rules. E.g.

1. If the CSP header is present and contains X, do ...

2. Otherwise, if the CSP header does not contain X, run these substeps:

2.1 If there's a X-Frame-Options header, do ...

To make it completely unambiguous what is expected from implementations.

Received on Tuesday, 12 March 2013 14:09:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:54:31 UTC