On 20 March 2013 13:54, Filip Maj <[email protected]> wrote: > Actually dude talks about CSP 1.1 supporting whitelisting of inline > scripts ? >
The relevant bit in the CSP spec is: http://www.w3.org/TR/CSP/#script-src tldr: servers can send CSPs (policies) that do allow inline scripts, but the policy specified by sysapps[1] does not. [1] default-src *; script-src 'self'; object-src 'none'; style-src 'self' > > On 3/20/13 8:39 AM, "Andrew Grieve" <[email protected]> wrote: > > >This recent security talk talks about why inline scripts are on the way > >out: > >https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=WljJ5guzcLs > > > >A good amount of the spec deals with application distribution, which is > >out > >of our hands when talking about App Stores. > > > >It uses a separate AppCache manifest to define what files are in the > >bundle. Does this not imply that the whitelist is still in effect via the > >Network: section of the AppCache manifest? > > > > > > > > > > > >On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 10:10 AM, Braden Shepherdson > ><[email protected]>wrote: > > > >> On the subject of no inline scripts or eval, this is used in the new v2 > >> Chrome Apps too. It eliminates a wide spectrum of security risks at a > >> stroke, though it does require changing some of the older web dev > >>practices > >> (onclick="whatever", primarily). If you're already attaching handlers > >>using > >> jQuery, or using something like AngularJS, this is no change. > >> > >> Only loading scripts from inside the app package, I'm not sure. It > >> eliminates the possibility of using a CDN, but the caching benefits of > >>that > >> are inferior to shipping the files in the bundle. > >> > >> Braden > >> > >> > >> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 6:46 AM, Brian LeRoux <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> > Ok, picking this up again. At the working group Fil it would be good > >> > to give our feedback on the manifest as it has related to the Cordova > >> > reality. > >> > > >> > I really dislike: > >> > > >> > - scripts can only be loaded from inside the app package > >> > - no inline scripts, no eval > >> > > >> > I really like the idea of killing the whitelist feature.. > >> > > >> > > >> > On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 7:06 AM, Michal Mocny <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > > Thanks for the highlights Fil. Makes for easier reading! > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 5:21 PM, Filip Maj <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > > > >> > >> Highlights w.r.t. Cordova: > >> > >> > >> > >> 1. Application manifest JSON (yay!) [1]: > >> > >> > >> > >> 2. There is an Application interface now in charge of handling: > >> > >> - pause/resume/launch/terminate events > >> > >> - readonly parameters such as install time, origin, parameters, > >> update > >> > >> state (downloading, installing), package size > >> > >> - methods such as exit, hide, uninstall, update (interesting!) > >> > >> - related to update, the spec calls for the update firing > >> > >> asynchronously, reporting back progress events to the app. metaaaa > >> > >> 3. App Management interface, which is deemed as a "privileged" > >>API, to > >> > get > >> > >> events about the (un)installation of other applications. > >> > >> > >> > >> Interesting "security" conclusions [2]: > >> > >> > >> > >> - scripts can only be loaded from inside the app package > >> > >> - no inline scripts, no eval > >> > >> - "Media (audio and video) can still be loaded from anywhere;" => > >>this > >> > >> should inform our media APIs once we get to the audit and finally > >> > >> determine that the whitelist has no effect on media. This already > >> > applies > >> > >> to images on the web. > >> > >> - "Network connections can still be opened anywhere using > >>data-centric > >> > >> APIs like XMLHttpRequest or WebSocket." => implication here is that > >> the > >> > >> whitelist is, really, useless (which has been my opinion always :D > >>) > >> > >> > >> > >> Related, I will be attending the SysApps Face to Face in madrid [3] > >> next > >> > >> month. If anyone from the Cordova community has specific issues > >>that > >> > they > >> > >> would like to see addressed, let me know! > >> > >> > >> > >> [1] http://runtime.sysapps.org/#application-manifest > >> > >> [2] http://runtime.sysapps.org/#csp-policy > >> > >> [3] > >> http://www.w3.org/wiki/System_Applications:_1st_F2F_Meeting_Agenda > >> > >> > >> > >> On 3/18/13 9:03 AM, "Giorgio Natili" <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> >It should be followed (I have had a quick look) but it depends > >>what > >> > does > >> > >> >it means from a development point of view. > >> > >> >I mean that there is already a roadmap and that this draft should > >> > impact a > >> > >> >lot, so is up to the contributors trying to explain us how much > >> effort > >> > is > >> > >> >required. > >> > >> > > >> > >> >Giorgio > >> > >> > > >> > >> >On 3/18/13 8:02 AM, "Brian LeRoux" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> > > >> > >> >>Have a look: http://runtime.sysapps.org/ > >> > >> >> > >> > >> >>What do we think? > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > >> > >
