Re: Requiring Authenticated Origins for Geolocation API's: Status

Joel Weinberger <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.org.w3c.tag
Message-ID <CAHQV2Kmozi5Csc5QKk_M93FVKGHdd7DhiMKCGD9s9vqC7uL5xQ@mail.gmail.com>
Great timing. We (Chrome) just announced an abstract plan to deprecate
geolocation over insecure channels (along with several other features:
device motion, EME, fullscreen, and getUserMedia). You can read the post as
made to public-webappsec or at
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!topic/blink-dev/2LXKVWYkOusSo
.

While we do not have an exact plan for deprecation, we do plan to implement
one and support this idea.
--Joel

On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 3:54 PM Mandyam, Giridhar <[email protected]>
wrote:

>  As you may recall if you have been reading this list, there was an open
> call for comments on requiring authenticated origins for the Geoloc API.
> There was one detailed response to this CFC from Martin Thomson of Mozilla
> (see
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-geolocation/2014Nov/0008.html),
> and some discussion after that.
>
>
>
> Since that time, there has been related work coming out of WebAppSec that
> affects this area:
>
>
>
> a)      The Mixed Content document (
> http://w3c.github.io/webappsec/specs/mixedcontent/) has continued to
> evolve.
>
> b)      The Privileged Contexts (“Powerful Features”) document (
> http://w3c.github.io/webappsec/specs/powerfulfeatures/) has taken shape
> as well, with a section on legacy features using Geoloc. as an example:
> see http://w3c.github.io/webappsec/specs/powerfulfeatures/#legacy.  Note
> that there are specific guidelines for sunsetting support for insecure
> origins in this section.
>
>
>
> While useful, it is hard to determine whether these documents
> (particularly handling of Legacy Features as described in the Privileged
> Contexts doc) represent strategies that user agent vendors are willing to
> implement specifically for Geolocation.  It is also unclear whether
> developers who are using the Geolocation API will be able to adapt to
> sunsetting of support for insecure origins.  The feedback received so far
> on the CFC has not represented enough of the affected parties. Based on
> this, I would like to continue the call for comments on this list until
> April 1.
>
>
>
> I have CC’ed the WebAppSec group and WebMob group, as there has been
> similar discussion in both groups.  I’ve also CC’ed the TAG.
>
>
>
> -Giri Mandyam, W3C Geolocation Working Group Chair
>
>
>
> *From:* Mandyam, Giridhar [mailto:[email protected]]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, November 05, 2014 7:24 AM
> *To:* public-geolocation
> *Subject:* Requiring Authenticated Origins for Geolocation API's: Open
> Call for Comments (deadline - February 1, 2015)
>
>
>
> As was discussed at TPAC 2014, the topic of requiring authenticated
> origins for geolocation is now being taken up in the form of an open call
> for comments on the public-geo mailing list.  An overview of the issue was
> presented at last week’s face-to-face meeting:
> https://www.w3.org/2008/geolocation/wiki/images/1/12/Geolocation_-_Trusted_Origin.pdf.
> The definition of “authenticated origin” may be found at
> http://w3c.github.io/webappsec/specs/mixedcontent/.  This requirement
> would apply to all specifications developed by the Geolocation Working
> Group.
>
>
>
> As decided at that meeting, before acting upon this issue it is important
> to gather feedback from affected parties.  This includes web service
> providers, developers, and browser (web runtime engine) vendors.
>
>
>
> The following is requested from respondents:
>
>
>
> a)      If you are against requiring authenticated origins for
> geolocation API’s, please state so and state your reasons for objection.
>
> b)      If you are in favor of requiring authenticated origins for
> geolocation API’s, please state so and your reasons for support.  In
> addition, please provide a proposal for how support for unauthenticated
> origins could be phased out (e.g. a schedule for developer evangelization,
> warning dialog boxes in browsers, hard cutoff for ending support in
> browsers).
>
>
>
> After responses are received, I will do my best to compile results and
> provide a representative synopsis of the feedback.  I hope this call for
> comments is clear as written above, but if not please let me know.
>
>
>
> -Giri Mandyam, Geolocation Working Group Chair
>
>
>
> P
>
>
>
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.