I'd like to present to the group for comment my "Content Restrictions"
proposal.
http://www.gerv.net/security/content-restrictions/

In a nutshell, it's a new HTTP header (or perhaps also an http-equiv
meta tag) which allows a web page to ask the user agent to place
restrictions of various sorts on script and other content within the
page. It's designed as a way for the UA to "read the web-designer's
mind", and so if (for example) the web designer says that the page does
not use any script at all, the UA can ignore script in the page as
obviously the result of a XSS attack.

In this way, it acts as a "backstop" which might catch various sorts of
content injection attack in the event of a failure in secure coding
practices. Because it's phrased as a set of restrictions, it is
backwardly-compatible with user agents which don't support it or only
support parts of it, whereas a positive capabilities-based system would
not be.

I know this group is more concerned with extensions to HTML markup, but
I was advised I might get good feedback on my proposal here. You may
also have discussed similar or different solutions to the problem; I
don't know, as (as my previous message notes) the list archives seem to
be currently unavailable. I do think a header-based rather than a purely
markup-based solution to this particular problem would be more secure,
but I'm open to counter-arguments :-)

I intend (with the usual caveats about good intentions) to try and to a
test implementation in the next few months to see if it could work in
practice.

Gerv

Reply via email to