Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Make recommendations around local-schemed frames. #2

Closed
mikewest opened this issue Feb 16, 2021 · 5 comments
Closed

Make recommendations around local-schemed frames. #2

mikewest opened this issue Feb 16, 2021 · 5 comments

Comments

@mikewest
Copy link
Member

On tonight's WebAppSec call, @shhnjk noted that we should specifically address <iframe src="data:..."> and <iframe srcdoc {sandbox}>, as both can create frames which contain dangerous content which could attack its parent. And he's right! We should!

We should also note that this risk is somewhat mitigated (or, at least, bandwidth-limited) by the requirement that COI be explicitly delegated to the frame via allow="cross-origin-isolated".

@shhnjk: Does this capture your concern?

@shhnjk
Copy link
Member

shhnjk commented Feb 16, 2021

We should also note that this risk is somewhat mitigated

I'm not sure if we want to communicate this way. COI context only makes attack easier, and normal context can still attack.

Also, it'll be also interesting to take telemetry of those frames, and look for process isolation.

@mikewest
Copy link
Member Author

I'm not sure if we want to communicate this way. COI context only makes attack easier, and normal context can still attack.

"somewhat mitigated" seems accurate, as there's a substantial reduction in attack bandwidth when shifting from COI environments to non-COI environments.

Also, it'll be also interesting to take telemetry of those frames, and look for process isolation.

I'm not sure what this would tell us? The numbers will be 0 in Firefox, for example. Does that substantially change the recommendations we'd want to make here?

@shhnjk
Copy link
Member

shhnjk commented Feb 19, 2021

I think when we say “mitigated”, it provides impression to developers that normal context is safe. Reduction in attack bandwidth sounds better.

I'm not sure what this would tell us? The numbers will be 0 in Firefox, for example. Does that substantially change the recommendations we'd want to make here?

Yeah, probably it’s off-topic in this discussion :)

@shhnjk
Copy link
Member

shhnjk commented Feb 20, 2021

After reading whole document, it's clear that the threat model outlined does indicates the following, which means any cross-site iframe can read content of parent. So maybe this point doesn't need to be added?

With this in mind, our general assumption will be that an origin gains access to any resource which it renders (including images, stylesheets, scripts, frames, etc). Likewise, embedded frames gain access to their ancestors' content.

@mikewest
Copy link
Member Author

To close this out, I added a note to https://w3c.github.io/webappsec-post-spectre-webdev/#local-scheme-frames.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants