[resending now that I'm a subscriber. Apologies to direct addessees for dups]
On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 7:14 PM, Mark S. Miller <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm not sure if we noticed this back during that thread, but by making the > error stack a property named by a per-context private symbol, we have a > place to stand to address the information leak. The result would be a > somewhat different API but morally equivalent to ses.getStack(error) < > http://code.google.com/p/google-caja/source/browse/trunk/src/com/google/caja/ses/debug.js > >. > > > On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 6:04 PM, Brendan Eich <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Ryosuke Niwa wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 5:18 PM, Ojan Vafai <[email protected] <mailto: >>> [email protected]>> wrote: >>> >>> This is an area where browsers are completely incompatible >>> already. I don't see much benefit from blocking on creating a >>> specification to make this situation better for web developers. >>> It's actually not that big of a deal if the error messages from >>> different browsers are different. >>> >>> >>> If Web developers wanted to know the details of failures on their >>> websites as opposed to on Inspector, wouldn't it better to add some sort of >>> API that could interoperate on all browsers? >>> >> >> Straw proposal for JS: >> >> http://wiki.ecmascript.org/**doku.php?id=strawman:error_**stack<http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=strawman:error_stack> >> >> Discussion head: >> >> https://mail.mozilla.org/**pipermail/es-discuss/2012-**June/023238.html<https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/2012-June/023238.html> >> >> Same concerns about information leaks. >> >> /be >> > > > > -- > Cheers, > --MarkM > -- Cheers, --MarkM
_______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
