Hmm, that's an interesting point.  I believe the concern was around potential 
for confusion when a mix of enforced and report-only policies was defined, so 
the admin wouldn't forget to flip the switch from reporting to enforcing and 
end up with a false sense of confidence.  There are also some implementation 
challenges with doing both; we'd need to track two separate set of policies, 
one enforced and one reporting-only, but active simultaneously.  The latter is 
a solvable problem but we already got a lot of feedback over the perceived 
complexity of the model. :)

Nevertheless I think your use case for parallel research / testing makes a lot 
of sense.
  Lucas.

On Mar 12, 2010, at 2:45 PM, Nick Kralevich wrote:

> https://wiki.mozilla.org/Security/CSP/Spec#Report-Only_mode
> 
> If both a X-Content-Security-Policy-Report-Only header and a
> X-Content-Security-Policy header are present in the same response, a warning
> is posted to the user agent's error console and any policy specified in
> X-Content-Security-Policy-Report-Only is ignored. The policy specified in
> X-Content-Security-Policy headers is enforced.
> 
> 
> Why is this?  This seems like an unnecessary burden which prevents groups
> from tightening their security policies over time.
> 
> For example, here at Google, I'm interested in helping resolve some of our
> Mixed Content warnings, so I might run the following header on all Google
> HTTPS sites:
> 
>  X-Content-Security-Policy-Report-Only: allow https://*:443; options
> inline_script eval-script; report-uri /someUri
> 
> This will allow me to collect information on all the mixed-content
> violations which may occur.
> 
> However, in the future, a different group may decide that they want to
> enforce a tighter policy, and may add the header:
> 
>  X-Content-Security-Policy: [something else]
> 
> All of a sudden, two reasonable changes by two different people will result
> in a user visible error, and will suppress my ability to collect information
> about mixed-content errors.
> 
> To me, it seems valuable to support both X-Content-Security-Policy
> and X-Content-Security-Policy-Report-Only, as it allows sites to test new
> restrictions without disrupting their current restrictions.
> 
> -- Nick
> _______________________________________________
> dev-security mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-security

_______________________________________________
dev-security mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-security

Reply via email to