- From: Dolière Francis SOME <doliere.some@inria.fr>
- Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 14:20:35 +0100 (CET)
- To: Scott Helme <scotthelme@hotmail.com>
- Cc: public-webappsec@w3.org
- Message-ID: <438551977.6085276.1484659235311.JavaMail.zimbra@inria.fr>
Hi Scott, Just to point you to a study related to what you are describing. Maybe you are aware of it. Anyway, it is a paper `May I? - Content Security Policy Endorsement for Browser Extensions` by Daniel Hausknecht , Jonas Magazinius and Andrei Sabelfeld Best, Dolière Francis SOME PhD Candidate / Security and Privacy in Web Applications ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Scott Helme" <scotthelme@hotmail.com> > To: public-webappsec@w3.org > Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2017 1:40:18 PM > Subject: Security headers and browser extensions > Hey everyone, > I wanted to bring up a question about security headers and the powers that > extensions have to modify them. > I run a free CSP reporting service and as a result work with a large amount > of organisations on deploying and monitoring CSP in the wild. On many > occasions over the last year I've seen some odd behaviour where items have > been blocked that simply didn't exist on the page or entries in a policy > that the host didn't insert. These have been tracked back to malicious > extensions and sometimes even adware/malware on the endpoint. > In the early days an extension would just blindly insert into the DOM and > cause a CSP violation as the source of the script/image/asset wasn't > whitelisted. I've used these reports to track the rise and fall of malicious > extensions. More recently I've worked with a few companies that are > receiving CSP reports that contain whitelisted hosts that they didn't put > there. After investigation it turns out that extensions that want to do > naughty things will now whitelist their origins in a CSP if one is present. > How thoughtful of them! This got me thinking about whether or not an > extension should be able to modify a security policy delivered by the host, > should the browser protect them? > This could also extend further beyond CSP too. An extension could strip out > HSTS, HPKP, XXP etc... Thoughts and input welcome! > Regards, > Scott Helme / Information Security Consultant > PGP Key > https://scotthelme.co.uk > https://report-uri.io > https://securityheaders.io > https://scotthel.me
Received on Tuesday, 17 January 2017 13:21:45 UTC