On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 12:17 PM, Thomas Roessler t...@w3.org wrote:
I'd suggest this instead:
Implementations should be careful about trusting path components found in
the zip archive: Such path components might be interpreted by operating
systems as pointing at security critical files
Hi Frederick,
On 3/17/09 1:01 PM, Frederick Hirsch wrote:
The latest draft includes the revised text from Thomas.
Marcos, are you suggesting we add something more? It sounds like what
you are saying here, is that it should be a valid widget file. Isn't
that part of PC checking? I'm not sure
On 3/17/09 12:59 PM, Frederick Hirsch wrote:
I already made this change :) to widget user agent. I think that should
work...
Sorry to be annoying, but we should be trying to architecturally design
all the specs to behave as independent as possible (and eradicate the
notion of an overall
Marcos, Frederick,
I should have asked Frederick to make the changes Marcos suggested
below. Sorry about that!
Anyhow, Frederick agreed to make the changes.
-Regards, Art Barstow
On Mar 17, 2009, at 8:44 AM, ext Marcos Caceres wrote:
On 3/17/09 12:59 PM, Frederick Hirsch wrote:
I
Marcos
Rather than replicating this, which might be error prone and hard to
maintain, perhaps Widget Signature should reference P C for this.
What do you think ?
regards, Frederick
On Mar 17, 2009, at 8:15 AM, ext Marcos Caceres wrote:
Hi Frederick,
On 3/17/09 1:01 PM, Frederick
On 3/17/09, Frederick Hirsch frederick.hir...@nokia.com wrote:
Marcos
Rather than replicating this, which might be error prone and hard to
maintain, perhaps Widget Signature should reference P C for this.
What do you think ?
I think that should be fine.
regards, Frederick
On Mar 17,
-Group
Cc: Frederick Hirsch; ext Marcos Caceres; WebApps WG; Thomas Roessler
Subject: Re: [widgets] Comments on Widget Signature update
(was RE: Widget Signature update)
Mark
Thanks for your review, I have some comments inline. Thomas,
can you please review my proposed change to the security
WG
Subject: Re: [widgets] Comments on Widget Signature update
(was RE: Widget Signature update)
On 13 Mar 2009, at 15:50, Frederick Hirsch wrote:
Thanks for your review, I have some comments inline. Thomas, can you
please review my proposed change to the security considerations text
Mark
Mark
Thanks for your review, I have some comments inline. Thomas, can you
please review my proposed change to the security considerations text
Mark mentioned?
Thanks
regards, Frederick
Frederick Hirsch
Nokia
On Mar 12, 2009, at 12:53 PM, ext Priestley, Mark, VF-Group wrote:
Hi
Hi Frederick, All,
Some comments on the updated specification but first let me again say
thanks for doing a great job making all the changes!
---
Substantive comments
---
3
Implementers are encouraged to provide mechanisms to enable end-users
to
10 matches
Mail list logo
