Thursday, 28 March 2013
- Re: CSP: set of report URIs
 - Re: CSP: set of report URIs
 - Re: CSP: set of report URIs
 - RE: CSP: set of report URIs
 - Re: Restricting <base> URLS via CSP
 
Wednesday, 27 March 2013
- Re: CORS and wildcards.
 - CORS and wildcards.
 - Re: Include page http response code in CSP reports?
 - Re: Include page http response code in CSP reports?
 
Tuesday, 26 March 2013
- Re: Include page http response code in CSP reports?
 - Re: Include page http response code in CSP reports?
 - Re: Restricting <base> URLS via CSP
 - Re: Restricting <base> URLS via CSP
 - Re: Restricting <base> URLS via CSP
 - Re: Restricting <base> URLS via CSP
 - Re: Restricting <base> URLS via CSP
 - Re: [webappsec] new draft of UI Security available
 
Monday, 25 March 2013
- [webappsec] Minutes from 26-Feb teleconference available
 - RE: [webappsec] new draft of UI Security available
 - [webappsec] Agenda for 25-March-2013 Teleconference
 - Re: [webappsec] new draft of UI Security available
 - [webappsec] new draft of UI Security available
 - Fwd: minor typo in CORS spec section 6.2?
 - Re: Restricting <base> URLS via CSP
 
Saturday, 23 March 2013
Wednesday, 20 March 2013
- Re: CSP: set of report URIs
 - Re: "form-action" status.
 - Re: SecurityPolicyViolation DOM events.
 - Re: SecurityPolicyViolation DOM events.
 - "form-action" status.
 - "source-file" vs "source-url"
 
Tuesday, 19 March 2013
- Include page http response code in CSP reports?
 - Re: About script-nonce
 - Re: CSP: set of report URIs
 - Re: CSP: set of report URIs
 - Re: CSP: set of report URIs
 - Re: CSP: set of report URIs
 - Re: CSP: set of report URIs
 - Re: SecurityPolicyViolation DOM events.
 - Re: Nonces/hashes in source expressions.
 - Re: SecurityPolicyViolation DOM events.
 - CSP: set of report URIs
 - Re: SecurityPolicyViolation DOM events.
 - SecurityPolicyViolation DOM events.
 - Re: Nonces/hashes in source expressions.
 
Monday, 18 March 2013
- Re: webappsec-ISSUE-45 ('top-only'): Is 'top-only' worth preserving? [UI Security]
 - [webappsec] FW: security model of Web Components, etc. - joint work with WebAppSec?
 - Re: webappsec-ISSUE-45 ('top-only'): Is 'top-only' worth preserving? [UI Security]
 - RE: Nonces/hashes in source expressions.
 - Re: Nonces/hashes in source expressions.
 - RE: Nonces/hashes in source expressions.
 - Re: Nonces/hashes in source expressions.
 - RE: Nonces/hashes in source expressions.
 - RE: Nonces/hashes in source expressions.
 - RE: Nonces/hashes in source expressions.
 - RE: Nonces/hashes in source expressions.
 - RE: webappsec-ISSUE-45 ('top-only'): Is 'top-only' worth preserving? [UI Security]
 - RE: Nonces/hashes in source expressions.
 - RE: Nonces/hashes in source expressions.
 - Nonces/hashes in source expressions.
 - Re: CSP: error handling
 - Re: CSP: error handling
 - Re: Restricting <base> URLS via CSP
 - Re: About script-nonce
 - Re: CSP - matching a URI against a source expression with no scheme
 - Re: Canonical paths
 - Re: CSP: error handling
 - Re: CSP - matching a URI against a source expression with no scheme
 - Re: ISSUE-38: Discuss no-mixed-content directive
 - Re: Heads up: proposal moving test repos to GitHub
 - Re: Blank blocked-uris
 - Re: Heads up: proposal moving test repos to GitHub
 - Re: Heads up: proposal moving test repos to GitHub
 
Friday, 15 March 2013
- Re: security model of Web Components, etc. - joint work with WebAppSec?
 - Re: security model of Web Components, etc. - joint work with WebAppSec?
 
Thursday, 14 March 2013
- Re: security model of Web Components, etc. - joint work with WebAppSec?
 - RE: security model of Web Components, etc. - joint work with WebAppSec?
 - CSP 1.0 copy&paste error
 
Wednesday, 13 March 2013
- please register for April face-to-face meeting
 - CSP - matching a URI against a source expression with no scheme
 - Re: webappsec-ISSUE-45 ('top-only'): Is 'top-only' worth preserving? [UI Security]
 
Tuesday, 12 March 2013
- RE: webappsec-ISSUE-45 ('top-only'): Is 'top-only' worth preserving? [UI Security]
 - Re: webappsec-ISSUE-45 ('top-only'): Is 'top-only' worth preserving? [UI Security]
 - Re: webappsec-ISSUE-45 ('top-only'): Is 'top-only' worth preserving? [UI Security]
 - RE: webappsec-ISSUE-45 ('top-only'): Is 'top-only' worth preserving? [UI Security]
 - Re: webappsec-ISSUE-45 ('top-only'): Is 'top-only' worth preserving? [UI Security]
 - Re: URLs
 - RE: URLs
 - CSP: URLs
 - CSP: error handling
 
Monday, 11 March 2013
- Re: webappsec-ISSUE-45 ('top-only'): Is 'top-only' worth preserving? [UI Security]
 - Re: security model of Web Components, etc. - joint work with WebAppSec?
 - Re: webappsec-ISSUE-45 ('top-only'): Is 'top-only' worth preserving? [UI Security]
 - [webappsec] Joel Weinberger's thesis on Analysis and Enforcement of Web Application Security Policies
 
Saturday, 9 March 2013
- Re: security model of Web Components, etc. - joint work with WebAppSec?
 - Re: webappsec-ISSUE-45 ('top-only'): Is 'top-only' worth preserving? [UI Security]
 - Re: webappsec-ISSUE-45 ('top-only'): Is 'top-only' worth preserving? [UI Security]
 
Friday, 8 March 2013
- security model of Web Components, etc. - joint work with WebAppSec?
 - Re: Canonical paths
 - [webappsec] updated test VM available
 
Wednesday, 6 March 2013
- [webappsec] WG survey results
 - RE: Certificate Revocation in Java
 - Certificate Revocation in Java
 - Re: ISSUE-38: Discuss no-mixed-content directive
 - Re: ISSUE-38: Discuss no-mixed-content directive
 - Re: Blank blocked-uris
 - RE: [webappsec] Proposed text for jsonp directives
 - Re: [webappsec] Proposed text for jsonp directives
 
Tuesday, 5 March 2013
- About script-nonce
 - Re: webappsec-ISSUE-45 ('top-only'): Is 'top-only' worth preserving? [UI Security]
 - webappsec-ISSUE-45 ('top-only'): Is 'top-only' worth preserving? [UI Security]
 - [webappsec] new draft of UI Security available
 
Friday, 1 March 2013
- Canonical paths
 - Re: CSP 1.0: Lax and strict CSS parsing rules
 - Re: CSP 1.0: Lax and strict CSS parsing rules
 - CSP 1.0: Lax and strict CSS parsing rules
 - Re: Restricting <base> URLS via CSP
 - Re: CORS: Requirement for HTTP 200 response on preflight is not web-compatible and doesn't seem to be interoperably implemented