RE: [From Web Crypto to TAG] About Secure Origin

We went over authenticated origins in the Geo WG F2F last week, and an open call-for-comments has been put on the list.  It was never the intention to make a decision on this topic during TPAC, as this impacts existing applications using Geolocation and needs a bit of thought.

Open call can be found here:  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-geolocation/2014Nov/0007.html.

-Giri Mandyam, Geolocation WG Chair

From: GALINDO Virginie [mailto:Virginie.Galindo@gemalto.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2014 6:35 AM
To: www-tag@w3.org
Cc: Harry Halpin; Wendy Seltzer; W3C Chairs
Subject: [From Web Crypto to TAG] About Secure Origin

Hello TAG (and W3C chairs, copied),

I am contacting you as chair of the Web Crypto WG.

Last week in TPAC, we have been addressing the question whether the Web Crypto API should be usable only with secure origin [1]. We have need encountering several problems while discussing, which were :

-          Does the TAG recommends a specific strategy (I heard from informal discussion with Mark Nottingham no, I heard from Alex Russel, yes) ?

-          Does the W3C has a common definition of  what is secure origin ?

-          Is there any possible granularity to require secure origin (e.g. use secure origin only for specific feature in a specification, which usage is particularly sensitive)?

-          What are the feedback from service eproviders on secure origin (we heard about Netflix, but what about the others) ?

-          Is there any easy migration path for W3C (and browser makers) to issue specifications without requiring secure origin, and later moving to mandating it.
FYI, in the end, we concluded that, provided the number of questions, provided the low interest of browser maker in the room to support secure origin, the fact that the web crypto is about to move to CR, we would not mandate the secure origin in the Web Crypto API.

I believe that those questions could apply to any new sensitive feature currently under development in W3C. Without asking the TAG to solve all the secure origin related bugs raised in github/tracker/bugzilla W3C WG, I think that it would be highly productive if the TAG could centralize and publish information helping to solve questions above. This would help all  W3C WG to take the decision to endorse or not secure origin, based on a common level of understanding of what it is.

Do you think this would be feasible in a short term ?
(I let other chairs confirming if they need or not such common framework).

Regards,
Virginie
Chair of web crypto WG

[1] Web Crypto WG minutes, see discussion related to bug 25972 http://www.w3.org/2014/10/30-crypto-minutes.html#item04

________________________________
This message and any attachments are intended solely for the addressees and may contain confidential information. Any unauthorized use or disclosure, either whole or partial, is prohibited.
E-mails are susceptible to alteration. Our company shall not be liable for the message if altered, changed or falsified. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, please delete it and notify the sender.
Although all reasonable efforts have been made to keep this transmission free from viruses, the sender will not be liable for damages caused by a transmitted virus.