- From: Brian Smith <brian@briansmith.org>
- Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2014 14:07:19 -0800
- To: "public-webappsec@w3.org" <public-webappsec@w3.org>
Below are three test cases regarding the interaction of CSP and the HTTP Link header, specifically for rel=stylesheet. The question in each case is whether the bad.css stylesheet should be loaded. I think this would be a good think to clarify in the spec. In particular, if <meta> cannot restrict the HTTP Link header, then that is worth calling out specifically. I also noticed an interesting study of support for the HTTP LINK header for rel=stylesheet [1]. It indicates that Firefox and old versions of Opera are the only major browsers that support the HTTP LINK header for rel=stylesheet. Perhaps it is a good idea to drop the HTTP LINK header with rel=stylesheet from HTML? This would be a good time to decide, because Blink is considering adding support now [2]. Cheers, Brian [1] https://greenbytes.de/tech/tc/httplink/ [2] https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=58456 HTTP/1.1 200 OK Content-Type: text/html Content-Security-Policy: style-src 'none' Link: <bad.css>; REL=stylesheet" <!DOCTYPE html> The Content-Security-Policy header precedes the Link header HTTP/1.1 200 OK Content-Type: text/html Link: <bad.css>; REL=stylesheet" Content-Security-Policy: style-src 'none' <!DOCTYPE html> The Content-Security-Policy header follows the Link header. HTTP/1.1 200 OK Content-Type: text/html Link: <bad.css>; REL=stylesheet" <!DOCTYPE html> <meta http-equiv=Content-Security-Policy content="style-src 'none'"> The Content-Security-Policy policy is defined using the meta element. bad.css: body { background-color: red }
Received on Sunday, 9 November 2014 22:07:46 UTC