[whatwg] How do sandboxed iframes interact with localStorage / sessionStorage / databases / etc?
ian at hixie.ch
Tue Jan 12 19:11:13 PST 2010
On Sat, 9 Jan 2010, Adam Barth wrote:
> The following question came up in implementing the sandbox attribute in WebKit:
> Description From Patrik Persson 2009-12-10 02:18:50 PST (-) [reply]
> This is a followup to bug 21288, which concerned the implementation of
> the HTML5 iframe sandbox attribute.
> How should WebKit interpret the HTML5 spec regarding sandboxed storage
> and databases? I believe the HTML5 spec does not say much explicitly
> on this, but rather relies on the origin sandboxing. Here is my
> * I think sessionStorage would make sense with sandboxed origins.
> * I think localStorage would end up equivalent to sessionStorage in a
> sandboxed frame, making it somewhat less useful. (The unique origin
> of a sandboxed frame means, in my interpretation, that the same
> frame would not be able to access its own localStorage in another
> * Similarly, I think a sandboxed database would be useful only within
> a session. The database could be reclaimed when the session ends.
> This defeats much of the purpose of databases, but perhaps it would
> still be useful for compatibility.
> The current implementation disables storage and databases in sandboxed
> frames. There is some more discussion in the thread for bug 21288,
> comments 43..49:
> ]] -- https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32369
> I think that disabling access to these APIs makes sense given that we
> disable access to cookies.
They now raise a SECURITY_ERR if called when the origin is not a
scheme/host/port tuple. (This also affects other times that the origin is
a unique ID, e.g. data: URLs in some situations.)
Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
More information about the whatwg