W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webappsec@w3.org > April 2016

Re: [referrer] Providing safer policy states

From: Emily Stark (Dunn) <estark@google.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2016 20:35:59 -0700
Message-ID: <CAPP_2SaryPgeVGXTAjhLPA-3URCs=Y_E=n=2vJQ7KxHfbZS1ZA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
Cc: Mike West <mkwst@google.com>, Francois Marier <francois@mozilla.com>, Jochen Eisinger <eisinger@google.com>, "public-webappsec@w3.org" <public-webappsec@w3.org>
On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 7:25 PM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl> wrote:

> On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 12:06 AM, Emily Stark (Dunn) <estark@google.com>
> wrote:
> > I was thinking maybe we could deprecate the latter (continue to support
> it
> > for a while, maybe with a console warning, and eventually drop support).
> > When parsing a referrer policy, we could first check if it matches one of
> > the enum values, and if not, then parse it as JSON. If it neither
> matches an
> > enum value nor parses as JSON, then we just ignore it.
>
> That doesn't sound great to me. The new syntax is more complicated and
> this is a feature we just introduced. If we start deprecating it now
> developers would likely get upset and lose some trust in the platform.
>

Just because they have to change referrerpolicy="origin" to
referrerpolicy="'origin'"? That doesn't seem so burdensome to me. (And in
Chrome we would follow the normal Blink deprecation process, including
measuring usage and only removing support when it's low enough.)

We already removed the CSP referrer directive in
https://github.com/w3c/webappsec-referrer-policy/pull/14. What's different
here? Because it's a newer feature?


>
>
> --
> https://annevankesteren.nl/
>
Received on Friday, 8 April 2016 03:36:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 14:54:19 UTC