Add section on limiting features to secure contexts #89
+62
−0
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
One idea I've had is that things could still be allowed when accessing something in private ip space (i.e. 10.0.0.0/8, 172.16.0.0/12, 192.168.0.0/16, fd00::/8; possibly also including 127.0.0.0/8 and ::1 for local development purposes). |
hadleybeeman
approved these changes
Apr 6, 2018
|
@daurnimator that may be worth raising on the secure contexts spec, since it relates to the definition of a secure context, although some of those issues may be implementation specific. |
Created w3c/webappsec-secure-contexts#60 |
|
Disappointing. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I'm opening a separate PR to replace #75 so that it can stay somewhat archived in its current state.
Based on the TAG's discussion yesterday, the conclusion was that we wouldn't come to consensus on strong advice on requiring secure contexts. Given that, @slightlyoff drafted some more explanatory text, which I've now merged with some of the still-usable advice I had in #75.