+1 to CSP as the "right way to do it". This all sounds very similar to what we ended up doing with the Android whitelist plugins: Default is (ugh) *, and the strong recommendation is to use CSP to actually filter requests from the WebView.
On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 7:24 PM, Shazron <shaz...@gmail.com> wrote: > Ah I forgot about the legacy whitelist plugin -- we can't remove the > whitelist totally then, but as you said "default > the new whitelist plugin to a 'wildcard' network request list until the > user adds any entries". > > That will preserve backwards compat. > > On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 4:18 PM, Treggiari, Leo <leo.treggi...@intel.com> > wrote: > > > I assume this is for the new whitelist plugin as opposed to the legacy > > whitelist plugin which will continue to use the current <access> tags. > > > > Another alternative, but not necessarily better, would be to default > > the new whitelist plugin to a 'wildcard' network request list until the > > user adds any entries. When they add an entry the default wildcard > > entry is replaced. > > > > Leo > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Shazron [mailto:shaz...@gmail.com] > > Sent: Monday, July 20, 2015 3:45 PM > > To: dev@cordova.apache.org > > Subject: Re: [iOS] proposed major whitelist change > > > > 1. "If a user is using CSP can we tell them to specify a single '*' entry > > for the network request whitelist (a.k.a. <access> tags)?" > > We could. But comes back to my point, why recommend *two* ways, it's just > > confusing -- especially if we recommend CSP and require an <access> > > wildcard. What I'm proposing is a permanent, unchangeable access wildcard > > effectively. > > > > 2. "If they are not using CSP, in spite of our recommendation, do the > > <access> tags provide an alternative, though inferior solution?" > > Yes, <access> is definitely inferior. > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 3:36 PM, Treggiari, Leo <leo.treggi...@intel.com > > > > wrote: > > > > > I'm not certain that this makes sense, but anyway... > > > > > > If a user is using CSP can we tell them to specify a single '*' entry > for > > > the network request whitelist (a.k.a. <access> tags)? > > > If they are not using CSP, in spite of our recommendation, do the > > > <access> tags provide an alternative, though inferior solution? > > > > > > And, is this different for the Android platform which already supports > > the > > > new whitelist plugin? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Leo > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Shazron [mailto:shaz...@gmail.com] > > > Sent: Monday, July 20, 2015 3:24 PM > > > To: dev@cordova.apache.org > > > Subject: [iOS] proposed major whitelist change > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/cordova-plugin-whitelist > > > > > > Previously, the initial implementation for the plugin for iOS didn't > > > support the <access> tag, but that proved problematic since not > > supporting > > > it meant all *native* code network connections were effectively > > > blacklisted. > > > > > > I added the support back in, but this will end up confusing the user > even > > > more. Right now we are recommending that the user support CSP, but that > > > only works in the context of the WebView (whether UIWebView or > > WKWebView) - > > > ie xhr, images, etc. > > > > > > If the user specified a CSP src for access to a domain in their .html, > > but > > > did not specify an <access> tag for that domain, the connection will > fail > > > (since the native code whitelist filters all network connections). So > > this > > > in effect doubles the number of declarations needed -- a CSP policy > needs > > > to have its mirror in the <access> tag. You can see where this can get > > > confusing. > > > > > > We could have a dynamic CSP parser in native code to dynamically > > "generate" > > > access tags but that will add on more complexity (but this would be > best > > > workaround). > > > > > > I propose that we get rid of the native code whitelist (effectively > > > allowing all connections) and rely on CSP only. I'm not sure that > > having a > > > native code whitelist can really be truly secure, with the dynamic > nature > > > of Objective-C this is just a façade anyway. > > > > > > In any case, native code whitelisting will only work on UIWebView, > there > > is > > > no way our current whitelisting system will work on WKWebView at all -- > > > more fodder for us to abandon our whitelisting system. > > > > > > The whitelisting should really be handled lower level by the system, > and > > > indeed this is coming in iOS 9 with Application Transport Security > (ATS): > > > > > > > > > https://developer.apple.com/library/prerelease/ios/technotes/App-Transport-Security-Technote/index.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40016240 > > > > > > The ATS whitelisting is through new tags in Info.plist, and we will > have > > to > > > map our existing whitelist tags to ATS when the time comes. > > > > > >
