Re: [whatwg] updateWithSanitizedHTML (was Re: innerStaticHTML)

2009-12-01 Thread Adam Barth
Your main point is well taken. There are some technical reasons why tag whitelisting makes more sense for inline content. For example, consider the case you mentioned on webkit-dev: @id. Inline, @id is problematic because the ids exist in a per-frame namespace, whereas they're harmless when the

Re: [whatwg] updateWithSanitizedHTML (was Re: innerStaticHTML)

2009-12-01 Thread Kornel Lesiński
The WebKit community is considering taking up such an experimental implementation. Here's my current proposal for how this might work: http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AZpchfQ5mBrEZGQ0cDh3YzRfMTJzbTY1cWJrNAhl=en I would appreciate any feedback on the design. Whitelist requires developers to

Re: [whatwg] updateWithSanitizedHTML (was Re: innerStaticHTML)

2009-12-01 Thread Adam Barth
2009/12/1 Kornel Lesiński kor...@geekhood.net: The WebKit community is considering taking up such an experimental implementation.  Here's my current proposal for how this might work: http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AZpchfQ5mBrEZGQ0cDh3YzRfMTJzbTY1cWJrNAhl=en I would appreciate any

Re: [whatwg] updateWithSanitizedHTML (was Re: innerStaticHTML)

2009-12-01 Thread Kornel Lesiński
And even whitelist for CSS properties couldn't be used to implement No external access policy (allow images with data: urls, allow http: links, but not http: images). This would be useful for webmails and other places where website doesn't want to allow 3rd parties tracking views. I

Re: [whatwg] updateWithSanitizedHTML (was Re: innerStaticHTML)

2009-12-01 Thread Adam Barth
2009/12/1 Kornel Lesiński kor...@geekhood.net: And even whitelist for CSS properties couldn't be used to implement No external access policy (allow images with data: urls, allow http: links, but not http: images). This would be useful for webmails and other places where website doesn't want to

[whatwg] updateWithSanitizedHTML (was Re: innerStaticHTML)

2009-11-30 Thread Adam Barth
On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 5:09 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote: Defining a spec-blessed whitelist of element, attributes, and attribute values is and filtering at the parser level is a significant new feature. While I see that it has value, I think on the short term it would be better to wait

Re: [whatwg] updateWithSanitizedHTML (was Re: innerStaticHTML)

2009-11-30 Thread Maciej Stachowiak
On Nov 30, 2009, at 3:55 PM, Adam Barth wrote: On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 5:09 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote: Defining a spec-blessed whitelist of element, attributes, and attribute values is and filtering at the parser level is a significant new feature. While I see that it has value,

Re: [whatwg] updateWithSanitizedHTML (was Re: innerStaticHTML)

2009-11-30 Thread Adam Barth
On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 5:43 PM, Maciej Stachowiak m...@apple.com wrote: 1) It seems like this API is harder to use than a sandboxed iframe. To use it correctly, you need to determine a whitelist of safe elements and attributes; providing an explicit whitelist at least of tags is mandatory.

Re: [whatwg] updateWithSanitizedHTML (was Re: innerStaticHTML)

2009-11-30 Thread Maciej Stachowiak
On Nov 30, 2009, at 6:32 PM, Adam Barth wrote: On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 5:43 PM, Maciej Stachowiak m...@apple.com wrote: 1) It seems like this API is harder to use than a sandboxed iframe. To use it correctly, you need to determine a whitelist of safe elements and attributes; providing an