All I'm saying is that if pinning config can be set via a manifest like structure vs headers, I'd suggest that headers take precedence. If I'm way off base or being disruptive, let me know off-list and I'll go back to lurking and popcorn. I'm really proud of all of you. I feel this is where websec really gets done. Keep up the great work! Aloha, -- Jim Manico @Manicode (808) 652-3805 On Jan 23, 2015, at 9:29 AM, Mike West <mkwst@google.com> wrote: On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 6:25 PM, Jim Manico <jim.manico@owasp.org> wrote: > Ok that's fair. Yea, to be honest I can even see CSP headers in a > manifest for some sites. Configuring all this in one place is compelling. > So I hope we can do a manifest OR per-page headers, with per-page headers > taking precedence. > The pinning model in the proposal uses the existing combination logic for multiple headers: resources simply need to pass all the policies applied to a protected resource. I think overriding the pinned policy completely would undermine its impact to some extent; I'd prefer to avoid doing that unless there's a good reason to. -- Mike West <mkwst@google.com>, @mikewest Google Germany GmbH, Dienerstrasse 12, 80331 München, Germany, Registergericht und -nummer: Hamburg, HRB 86891, Sitz der Gesellschaft: Hamburg, Geschäftsführer: Graham Law, Christine Elizabeth Flores (Sorry; I'm legally required to add this exciting detail to emails. Bleh.)
Received on Friday, 23 January 2015 17:39:12 UTC