- From: Jason Proctor <jason@mono.hm>
- Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 11:01:46 -0700
- To: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@w3.org>
- Cc: public-webcrypto@w3.org, Mike West <mkwst@google.com>, Brad Hill <hillbrad@fb.com>
- Message-ID: <CALQanAKiYksr3kHf1u_BCmCfUQgNZXL5WKroQFUJ0WCo8LV9Yg@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 5:44 AM, Harry Halpin <hhalpin@w3.org> wrote: > > > On 07/15/2016 09:30 PM, Jason Proctor wrote: > > there's currently an exception made when the origin is localhost. i trust > that exception will be allowed to remain? > > > I think that will be discussed on the call today. > > @Mike - any opinion? > i notice also that there is an exception made for WebCrypto applications embedded in applications, eg, loading from the assets bundle via a file: URL on Android. given that these environments are reasonably secure, i'd like to see that exception maintained too. > > > > On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 8:53 AM, Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com> wrote: > >> I believe the proposal on the call was to _require_ a secure origin >> for access to WebCrypto methods. So, a browser which supported them on >> an insecure context would be non-compliant. >> >> This means that WebCrypto methods should fail if the origin is not >> secure (or, more specifically, I've proposed in a PR 'if the incumbent >> settings object is not a secure context'). >> >> An alternative might be that window.crypto.subtle is undefined if the >> origin is not secure, but methods failing is what Chrome already does. >> >> ...Mark >> >> > On Jul 14, 2016, at 7:59 AM, Harry Halpin <hhalpin@w3.org> wrote: >> > >> > Also, feel free to comment on Github rather than the list: >> > https://github.com/w3c/webcrypto/issues/28 >> > >> >> On 07/14/2016 04:35 PM, Harry Halpin wrote: >> >> We're thinking of adding a sentence saying that secure origins should >> be >> >> required for the use of WebCrypto. >> >> >> >> In detail, we'd like to follow the definition of a secure context given >> >> here [1], although since that document is still an editor's draft so we >> >> will instead say that the "The top-level browsing context should be >> >> secure when using the WebCrypto API." >> >> >> >> People may also want to see this document, which mentions how the use >> of >> >> WebCrypto within a secure origin can lead to l >> >> https://w3c.github.io/webappsec-secure-contexts/#ancestors >> >> >> >> Since all browsers support WebCrypto using TLS, this should not change >> >> the test-suite or conformance requirements. As long as browsers enable >> >> the usage of WebCrypto in TLS, we will not consider them non-conformant >> >> if they offer the usage of WebCrypto outside TLS. However, given it is >> >> not best practice, this note will at least inform developers to use TLS >> >> properly when using WebCrypto, as otherwise (as we've seen), some >> >> developers may believe enabling WebCrypto without TLS may give them >> >> security properties it indeed does not. >> >> >> >> We'll have a two week period for discussion before making any changes >> to >> >> the spec in this regard. >> >> >> >> cheers, >> >> harry >> >> >> >> [1] https://w3c.github.io/webappsec-secure-contexts >> > >> > >> >> > >
Received on Wednesday, 3 August 2016 18:02:18 UTC