- From: Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com>
- Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 11:32:41 -0800
- To: cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>
- Cc: "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
Received on Tuesday, 21 January 2014 19:33:29 UTC
Indeed, hence "defense in depth" (i.e. you still need to pick a window for sharing from the chooser) On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 9:42 PM, cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org> wrote: > On 14/01/2014 12:31 PM, Martin Thomson wrote: > >> On 14 January 2014 05:23, Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org> wrote: >> >>> How about tying this to CORS? If you already grant cross-origin access >>> to your Web content via CORS, can it be inferred you're happy to share >>> its content via screen sharing? >>> >> That doesn't really work in that the iframe (or other cross origin >> content) is acquired without the CORS preflight. I was thinking >> Frame-Options actually. >> >> > Amusing read about browser extensions: http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/ > comments/1vjj51/i_am_one_of_the_developers_of_a_popular_chrome/ > > By the time you notice that an extension has become malicious, over 700k > users could have had their banking records stolen. Point is: hiding > security-sensitive features behind extensions does not (on its own) ensure > security. > > Gili > >
Received on Tuesday, 21 January 2014 19:33:29 UTC