- From: Crispin Cowan <crispin@microsoft.com>
- Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2015 19:37:24 +0000
- To: Jim Manico <jim.manico@owasp.org>, Brad Hill <hillbrad@gmail.com>
- CC: Mike West <mkwst@google.com>, Brian Smith <brian@briansmith.org>, "public-webappsec@w3.org" <public-webappsec@w3.org>
To be clear, are you saying that there is a need for secure placement? Or that there is actually a need for multiple competing versions of secure placement? -----Original Message----- From: Jim Manico [mailto:jim.manico@owasp.org] Sent: Monday, February 9, 2015 11:32 AM To: Brad Hill Cc: Mike West; Brian Smith; public-webappsec@w3.org Subject: Re: iframe sandbox for third-party widgets and ads (was Re: [CSP] Clarifications on nonces) > I don't think there is a realistic opportunity to create a market for > N different and incompatible flavors of "secure" placement With respect, this is a core need from advertisers which heavily funds the free web. If this is not addressed, advertisers will try to circumvent standards and go for the holes. I'd rather see a more verbose standard that addresses this need so they stay "in the fold". Feeling dirty. Aloha, -- Jim Manico @Manicode (808) 652-3805 > On Feb 9, 2015, at 8:23 PM, Brad Hill <hillbrad@gmail.com> wrote: > > I don't think there is a realistic opportunity to create a market for > N different and incompatible flavors of "secure" placement
Received on Monday, 9 February 2015 19:37:52 UTC