- From: Ian Fette <ifette@google.com>
- Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2007 14:47:14 -0700
- To: public-wsc-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <bbeaa26f0708011447n42d0596bu941e18211a92d4fb@mail.gmail.com>
Hi all, I took on an action item in today's distributed meeting to add a use case for a user browsing to a known malware site which has been previously visited. I wanted to send this out to the list for comments, since I know we're trying to come to consensus on the scope and use cases document. Here's the use case I would like to add: Betty tries to connect to a web site at <http://www.example.com/>. She visits this site frequently to read various news and articles. Since her last visit, the site example.com has been compromised by some method, and visitors are now being infected with malware. A blacklist used by her user agent has since listed example.com as a known bad site, what warnings should Betty be presented with? Destination Site - Known, Prior visit Navigation - any Intended interaction - Information retrieval Actual interaction - software installation Note - This is slightly different than use case 19. It still deals with how to present results obtained from reputation services, but in the case of a user returning to a site that they believe to be "good" when that site is now believed to be compromised. (If anyone has questions about whether this should be in scope, I would emphatically say yes... it falls under 4.4 in the use case document (Third-party recommendation) in the case of blacklists, can potentially fall under 4.5 if a user agent takes history into account (i.e. you're navigating to example.com which you visit daily, but now for some reason it's on a blacklist your browser uses). This is not meant to be detection, but how to display a warning that you're navigating to a site known to be malicious by a trusted (3rd) party. Further, the document states "The Working Group will only consider Web interactions in which a human participates in making a trust decision" - visiting a site that is on a malware blacklist presents a trust decision - do I trust this site to be safe to visit, or do I believe the warning that my browser and system are about to be owned if I actually visit this site? If anyone has questions / concerns / suggestions regarding this proposed use case, I'd love to hear them. Regards, Ian Fette
Received on Wednesday, 1 August 2007 21:47:25 UTC