- From: David Ross <drx@google.com>
- Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2017 15:37:33 -0700
- To: Alex Russell <slightlyoff@google.com>
- Cc: Emily Stark <estark@google.com>, "public-webappsec@w3.org" <public-webappsec@w3.org>, Mike West <mkwst@google.com>, Charlie Reis <creis@google.com>, Tanvi Vyas <tanvi@mozilla.com>
- Message-ID: <CAMM+ux6H+pZLOmMVBKqHVGZnfRiYkJ-5hWb2vihzWpVHVZt+EQ@mail.gmail.com>
> > David Ross (cc'ed) might also want to share some thinking he's done about > alternative shapes for the part of the proposal that deals with navigation > restrictions. That would be: https://wicg.github.io/isolation/navmanager.html However section 5 is now out of date w.r.t. the mechanism described in the primary doc (https://wicg.github.io/isolation/index.html). The earlier sections of the nav manager doc should still provide some useful / relevant context on the navigation manager concept overall. I will likely adapt section 5 in my nav manager doc to be consistent with the approach Emily's described in the primary doc. On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 3:27 PM, Alex Russell <slightlyoff@google.com> wrote: > A few questions: > > - The note about needing to process Isolation before cookies is > interesting. Does it mean that this won't be possible to do from a <meta> > tag equivalent? > - What's the issue with isolation and iframing? I'd have thought that > one of the valuable aspects of double-keying is protection from iframing. > That is, you can run your main service as isolated and if anyone iframes > you, the isolation won't be invoked (you'll be in the main storage > container) and therefore that "version" simply won't have ambient authority. > - I'd love a solution to opener disownership that's generic. > - I'm not sure I understand the serviceworker integration points. If > the behavior of isolation is double-keying when isolated, doesn't this just > imply that these are parallel (separate) SW registrations? > > Thanks! > > On Tuesday, April 25, 2017, Emily Stark <estark@google.com> wrote: > >> On the last call, I mentioned that I would send out an "Isolate-Me" >> draft. This is a proposal for a mechanism by which an origin can opt in to >> isolate itself from other web content -- probably most useful for >> high-value security-critical applications that are willing to give up some >> functionality for such isolation. >> >> Please take a look at this faint ghost of a spec that aims to explain the >> threat model more and nail down what these isolation mechanisms are: >> https://wicg.github.io/isolation/index.html >> >> Any comments or feedback, either here or in the GitHub repo, would be >> very welcome. >> >> David Ross (cc'ed) might also want to share some thinking he's done about >> alternative shapes for the part of the proposal that deals with navigation >> restrictions. >> >> Thanks! >> Emily >> >
Received on Tuesday, 25 April 2017 22:38:27 UTC