People generally agree that "content restrictions" are a good idea and will be a useful tool for websites. Various designs have emerged with different approaches as to how restrictions should be defined by sites and applied by browsers. I would like to propose a framework with which to evaluate and compare the designs to help guide us to a common solution.
The following can be used to determine the costs and benefits of any particular model for content restrictions: 1. How flexible is the model? How many different use cases does the model support? Does the model allow sites to keep their baseline functionality intact? 2. How easy is the model to implement for web sites? How much specialized knowledge is required by admins? 3. What will the process of developing an appropriate policy look like for a given model? 4. How easy does the model make it for an organization to reason about the correctness or optimality of their policy? 5. How will the model fit into organizations' existing workflows? For example, how easily will organizations who currently perform positive or negative testing incorporate the model? 6. How extensible is the model? How will the model handle future changes such as the addition of a new directive, changes in the semantics of an existing directive (e.g. script-src now restricts plugins' scriptability), or a change in default behavior (inline style now blocked by default)? Please feel free to add any additional criteria that seem appropriate. Cheers, Brandon _______________________________________________ dev-security mailing list dev-security@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-security
