W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webappsec@w3.org > November 2014

RE: [MIX] 4.5 User Controls

From: Mike O'Neill <michael.oneill@baycloud.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2014 14:25:56 -0000
To: "'Brad Hill'" <hillbrad@gmail.com>
Cc: "'Anne van Kesteren'" <annevk@annevk.nl>, "'Mike West'" <mkwst@google.com>, "'WebAppSec WG'" <public-webappsec@w3.org>
Message-ID: <156601cff772$16422600$42c67200$@baycloud.com>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi Mike,

Browser extensions or other intermediaries can break CSP so it is not a good idea to encourage them to enable improvements. Anyway they are usually not available for mobile UAs.

There is a very large use-case for European e-privacy and data protection compliance, and there could easily eventually also be for DNT IMO.

Mike




> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brad Hill [mailto:hillbrad@gmail.com]
> Sent: 03 November 2014 02:17
> To: Mike O'Neill
> Cc: Anne van Kesteren; Mike West; WebAppSec WG
> Subject: Re: [MIX] 4.5 User Controls
> 
> Mike, there are a number of extensions (browser-specific) that allow
> setting (or adding) user specified content security policies.
> Certainly the spec doesn't forbid this, either.
> 
> See, e.g. "User CSP" on Firefox and "Caspr: Enforcer" and "Content
> Security Policy Modifier" for Chrome.
> 
>  I doubt there is much interest in directly providing this as a core
> user-agent feature given the likely size of the audience for this kind
> of feature.
> 
> -Brad
> 
> On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 2:20 AM, Mike O'Neill
> <michael.oneill@baycloud.com> wrote:
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > Has there been any consideration for UA settings being able to make the CSP
> more restrictive? Like using the presence of a DNT header or an opt-in cookie?
> Something like
> >
> > script-src adco.fr[dnt:0] scriptlib.com;
> >
> > adco.fr only gets allowed if DNT:0 is present.
> >
> > Or for an opt-in cookie:
> >
> > script-src adco.fr[cookie:consent=yes] scriptlib.com;
> >
> > Mike O'Neill
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: annevankesteren@gmail.com [mailto:annevankesteren@gmail.com]
> On
> >> Behalf Of Anne van Kesteren
> >> Sent: 31 October 2014 08:35
> >> To: Brad Hill
> >> Cc: Mike West; WebAppSec WG
> >> Subject: Re: [MIX] 4.5 User Controls
> >>
> >> On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 9:29 AM, Brad Hill <hillbrad@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > I don't want users to be socially engineered into attacking
> >> > themselves, either, but we respect the priority of constituencies.  In
> >> > the end, it is the user's agent, not the resource's.  UAs can make
> >> > choices to warn users or make it difficult to do harm to themselves,
> >> > and some might not provide any affordances around CSP, but I don't
> >> > think it's appropriate to add normative text forbidding the user to
> >> > modify CSP.
> >>
> >> I guess that's fair. But then I think I stand by my request to make it
> >> clear in MIX that not all blocked fetches are equal and that you
> >> probably don't want to use the same UI to cater to e.g. CSP and MIX.
> >> Or MIX could simply not say anything about user control either...
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> https://annevankesteren.nl/
> >
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > Version: GnuPG v1.4.13 (MingW32)
> > Comment: Using gpg4o v3.3.26.5094 - http://www.gpg4o.com/
> > Charset: utf-8
> >
> >
> iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUU1RvAAoJEHMxUy4uXm2JiJoH/2SvDAlZ2LOiVXwsxeANxeO
> V
> > PqplSOSp+2vPDx0eGsiZLnMLCLbhLHVaj8b4HTzvQiKL1v31HTVi/ybiEY/DOta9
> >
> o/r7GX9eqoUT3vH4W4h3b2CFGdVP8KTSTUa0Xd9pHXUs13zfUGElHXcR1G/UQpJ
> C
> > KY3d3ygJ13/Usn1dSeJ6ik+C6SNlTUlCTjst2YgNxEiNJYgREuymbABlp4kQ34yO
> >
> tSWUBWounprP1JSwM6VSb7YTMCkBLs6xgJlc2pl26344iWadBNzEzXhkdN+VdZh2
> >
> Ff5m0v7GXNfYHNh7RvmOBYv1d7FOF739QKlOFz+X+K+rLUbJcpL+yluNl29MI94=
> > =9uxZ
> > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> >

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.13 (MingW32)
Comment: Using gpg4o v3.3.26.5094 - http://www.gpg4o.com/
Charset: utf-8

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUV5B0AAoJEHMxUy4uXm2JrswH/A4HMbAkfydtd7x2OGQtzpB+
Ywo5hAbLGWUEs1KCuGy2mb2+jQyY64o+SC6xq6tpmsPQh9oigGbPa+ueAPrPgXOG
9hfjfJDRrO6/NZY/e8ceNL8aZNX7NM6i3Rn908JyvKKh9B3jWoifh31tYm/tXKoy
5dxCY5odCVAj3BnLrkDFfDNL+vdcIk0UyDJsX+klaVeyLVS6lHA7p9pvEZDs1R8P
MgLfh//W7kh20J4UOEY9Lo6kt2VB8F9dgXdnw9sZyP4gE+uogOHNdZDfWvCq93Hv
azCXU6yu6oO1QUlVjYHt3WaOa224jcfjOXtBZB6XeaPDrT5KhVMtShybtoXrMDc=
=g+KD
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Monday, 3 November 2014 14:26:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 14:54:07 UTC