On 03/21/2014 03:49 PM, Hill, Brad wrote:
> WebSec WG members,
> 
>   The WebAppSec WG at the W3C has recently announced a First Public Working 
> Draft for "Subresource Integrity".
> 
> http://www.w3.org/TR/SRI/
> 
>   This specification describes a method to add metadata about the hash 
> identity of resources (like script files and images) to HTML and specify 
> policy about how to verify and manage such resources before they are added to 
> a web resource's Document Object Model.


thanks for this heads-up about this draft.  I'm glad to see more work in
this area.

a few concerns spring to mind:

handling cross-origin errors
-----------------------------

section 6.3 mentions cross-origin data leakage -- i'm glad to see this
discussed.  However, it suggests that UAs SHOULD refuse to fire error
events on cross-origin resources.  This contradicts section 3.5.4, which
claims that if the C-S-P of the origin page has a failure-mode of
"block" or "fallback" (the only values available?) then the UA MUST
report a violation.

"report a violation" itself is linked to
http://www.w3.org/TR/CSP11/#dfn-report-a-violation, which says the UA
MUST fire a violation event.

how is a UA expected to resolve these contradictions? Or am i missing
some nuance that makes these non-contradictory?

hash algorithm agility
----------------------

hash function agility raises questions about future interactions; I'm
glad to see it mentioned in section 6.2, but i don't think the text
there is sufficient.

let's imagine a future where SHA-256 is deemed to be broken; how should
a user-agent deal with elements with an SHA-256-based integrity
attribute?  should the UA treat the element as though it had no
integrity tag at all (value="indeterminate")?  or should it treat the
element as though it was compromised (value="corrupt")?  If we choose
value="indeterminate" and the origin's integrity-policy has
"require-for-all", what should happen?

being explicit about how we will handle algorithm deprecation in the
future will make future transitions much less painful.

regards,

        --dkg

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
websec mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/websec

Reply via email to