Internet DRAFT - draft-west-webappsec-csp-reg
draft-west-webappsec-csp-reg
Network Working Group M. West
Internet-Draft Google, Inc
Intended status: Informational November 20, 2015
Expires: May 23, 2016
Initial Assignment for a Content Security Policy Directive Registry
draft-west-webappsec-csp-reg-04
Abstract
This document establishes an Internet Assigned Number Authority
(IANA) registry for Content Security Policy directives, and populates
that registry with the directives defined in the Content Security
Policy Level 2 specification.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on May 23, 2016.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
West Expires May 23, 2016 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft webappsec-csp-reg November 2015
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Use of the Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3.1. Content Security Policy directives Registry . . . . . . . 3
3.2. Registration Policy for Content Security Policy
directives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Appendix A. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1. Introduction
The Content Security Policy specification [CSP] defines a mechanism
by which web developers can control the resources which a particular
page can fetch or execute, as well as a number of security-relevant
policy decisions.
The policy language specified in that document consists of an
extensible set of "directives", each of which controls a specific
resource type or policy decision. This specification establishes a
registry to ensure that extensions to CSP are listed and
standardized.
2. Use of the Registry
Content Security Policy directives must be documented in a readily
available public specification in order to be registered by IANA.
This documentation must fully explain the syntax, intended usage, and
semantics of the directive. The intent of this requirement is to
assure interoperable independent implementations, and to prevent
accidental namespace collisions between implementations of dissimilar
features.
Documents defining new Content Security Policy directives must
register them with IANA, as described in Section 3. The IANA
registration policy for such parameters is "Specification Required"
[RFC5226], and is further discussed in Section 3.2.
3. IANA Considerations
This specification creates a new top-level IANA registry named
"Content Security Policy directives".
West Expires May 23, 2016 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft webappsec-csp-reg November 2015
3.1. Content Security Policy directives Registry
New Content Security Policy directives, and updates to existing
directives, must be registered with IANA.
When registering a new Content Security Policy directive, the
following information must be provided:
o The directive's name, an ASCII string conforming to the
"directive-name" rule specified in Section 4.1 of [CSP]. The ABNF
[RFC5234] is as follows:
directive-name = 1*( ALPHA / DIGIT / "-" )
o A reference to the readily available public specification defining
the new directive's syntax, usage, and semantics.
The following table contains the initial values for this registry:
+-----------------+-----------+
| Directive Name | Reference |
+-----------------+-----------+
| base-uri | [CSP] |
| child-src | [CSP] |
| connect-src | [CSP] |
| default-src | [CSP] |
| font-src | [CSP] |
| form-action | [CSP] |
| frame-ancestors | [CSP] |
| frame-src | [CSP] |
| img-src | [CSP] |
| media-src | [CSP] |
| object-src | [CSP] |
| plugin-types | [CSP] |
| report-uri | [CSP] |
| sandbox | [CSP] |
| script-src | [CSP] |
| style-src | [CSP] |
+-----------------+-----------+
3.2. Registration Policy for Content Security Policy directives
The registration policy for Content Security Policy directives is
"Specification Required" [RFC5226], which uses a designated expert to
review the specification.
West Expires May 23, 2016 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft webappsec-csp-reg November 2015
When appointing an Expert (or Experts), the IESG SHOULD draw from the
W3C's security community, coordinating through the liaison.
The designated expert, when deliberating on whether to include a new
directive in the registry, should consider the following criteria.
This is not an exhaustive list, but representative of the issues to
consider when rendering a decision:
o Content Security Policy is a restrictive feature, which allows web
developers to deny themselves access to resources and APIs which
would otherwise be available. Deploying Content Security Policy
is, therefore, a strict reduction in risk. The expert should
carefully consider whether proposed directives would violate this
property.
o Granular directives are valuable, but the expert should strive to
strike a reasonable balance between providing developers with all
the knobs and switches possible, and providing only those with
known security implications.
4. Security Considerations
The registry in this document does not in itself have security
implications. The directives specified, however, certainly do. The
documents referenced when registering new directives must contain
detailed security and privacy considerations sections, and should
contain usage information which informs web developers as to the
directive's expected implementation.
5. References
5.1. Normative References
[CSP] West, M., Barth, A., and D. Veditz, "Content Security
Policy Level 2", n.d., <https://www.w3.org/TR/CSP2>.
[RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5226, May 2008,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5226>.
[RFC5234] Crocker, D., Ed. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax
Specifications: ABNF", STD 68, RFC 5234, DOI 10.17487/
RFC5234, January 2008,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5234>.
West Expires May 23, 2016 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft webappsec-csp-reg November 2015
5.2. Informative References
[RFC5341] Jennings, C. and V. Gurbani, "The Internet Assigned Number
Authority (IANA) tel Uniform Resource Identifier (URI)
Parameter Registry", RFC 5341, DOI 10.17487/RFC5341,
September 2008, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5341>.
Appendix A. Acknowledgements
Much of this document's structure comes from [RFC5341]. Thank you to
Cullen Jennings and Vijay K. Gurbani for giving me a reasonable
template to work within, and to Barry Leiba for his helpful
commentary and suggestions.
Author's Address
Mike West
Google, Inc
Email: mkwst@google.com
URI: https://mikewest.org/
West Expires May 23, 2016 [Page 5]
