[whatwg] Seeking clarification on sandboxed iframes and plugins (Flash, etc.)

2014-12-02 Thread James M. Greene
I have recently begun receiving issue reports about my JavaScript library, ZeroClipboard, not working in some common developer websites such as JSFiddle, CodePen, etc. The common thread here is that the problematic sites all host their snippets within sandboxed iframes... but ZeroClipboard relies

Re: [whatwg] Seeking clarification on sandboxed iframes and plugins (Flash, etc.)

2014-12-02 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 12/2/14, 7:46 AM, James M. Greene wrote: 1. Is there any existing way or guidance for browser vendors on how to confirm that a plugin can be secured and thus allowed to be instantiated within a sandboxed iframe? As far as I know, there is not. For Gecko there definitely is not. 2. Is

Re: [whatwg] Seeking clarification on sandboxed iframes and plugins (Flash, etc.)

2014-12-02 Thread James M. Greene
OK, those answers are all about what I expected, particularly the note about securing the API surface of Flash. So, it sounds like sandboxed iframes will probably *never* support plugin instantiation -- even if such a plugin were hosted on the same origin as both the iframe page *and* top-level

Re: [whatwg] Seeking clarification on sandboxed iframes and plugins (Flash, etc.)

2014-12-02 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 12/2/14, 8:01 AM, James M. Greene wrote: So, it sounds like sandboxed iframes will probably /never/ support plugin instantiation -- even if such a plugin were hosted on the same origin as both the iframe page /and/ top-level page. For Gecko it depends. For example, we plan to ship a PDF

Re: [whatwg] Seeking clarification on sandboxed iframes and plugins (Flash, etc.)

2014-12-02 Thread James M. Greene
Actually, sandboxing iframes of your own site is one of the main sandbox use cases: ... Oh, hehe. ... it allows limited user upload of content without creating security holes, in theory. Then let us hope that such content creation/collection/uploading doesn't require the use of