webappsec-permissions-policy
A mechanism to selectively enable and disable browser features and APIs (by w3c)
webappsec-feature-policy
A mechanism to selectively enable and disable browser features and APIs [Moved to: https://github.com/w3c/webappsec-permissions-policy] (by w3c)
| webappsec-permissions-policy | webappsec-feature-policy | |
|---|---|---|
| 5 | 1 | |
| 393 | 302 | |
| 0.3% | - | |
| 6.9 | 4.5 | |
| 6 days ago | almost 3 years ago | |
| Bikeshed | Shell | |
| GNU General Public License v3.0 or later | GNU General Public License v3.0 or later |
The number of mentions indicates the total number of mentions that we've tracked plus the number of user suggested alternatives.
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
webappsec-permissions-policy
Posts with mentions or reviews of webappsec-permissions-policy.
We have used some of these posts to build our list of alternatives
and similar projects. The last one was on 2022-11-24.
-
Smart Move, Google
Thanks for the docs. The examples (2 & 3, https://github.com/w3c/webappsec-permissions-policy/blob/mai...) seem to me to say that search.google.com can’t grant location permissions to an iframe if the parent was forbidden them, but I didn't find an explicit example for what happens if the iframe domain already got permission previously.
As you say the UI for requesting in this case would be weird, and this seems like a big security hole to me, but I can’t see a bit of the spec that explicitly forbids (though I only scanned the doc.)
-
Amazon is blocking Google’s FLoC
there is apparently no way to define a default disable either, so to turn off all the random features, the header becomes huge.
https://github.com/w3c/webappsec-permissions-policy/issues/1...
What is happening in w3c?!
-
Optimise your site - Addressing recommendations from securityheaders.com
This took a fair bit of investigation. I'm not convinced that it's the most well-documented header, in terms of the properties that you can set. Effectively, this is a list of values that determine which permissions are allowed for this website. Given I don't need access to location, camera, microphone or accelerometer. I did have issues finding consistent documentation on this one, so ended up having to combine the Feature-Policy documentation from MDN as well as the permissions policy examples from w3c.
-
User-Agent Client-Hints, take 2
Since Chrome v84 the Chrome team has had a few set backs which has resulted in some changes. In addition, the feature policy header, for delegating the client hints to third parties, has changed name to Permissions-Policy.
webappsec-feature-policy
Posts with mentions or reviews of webappsec-feature-policy.
We have used some of these posts to build our list of alternatives
and similar projects. The last one was on 2021-06-15.
-
Amazon is blocking Google’s FLoC
https://github.com/w3c/webappsec-feature-policy/blob/master/...
Each feature takes an allowlist, specifying which, if any, origins can use the feature.
What are some alternatives?
When comparing webappsec-permissions-policy and webappsec-feature-policy you can also consider the following projects:
ichnaea - Mozilla Ichnaea
OsmAnd - OsmAnd
ua-client-hints - Wouldn't it be nice if `User-Agent` was a (set of) client hints?