DOCSLIB.ORG

Web Applications Security and Privacy Dolière Francis Some

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Web Applications Security and Privacy Dolière Francis Some Web applications security and privacy Dolière Francis Some To cite this version: Dolière Francis Some. Web applications security and privacy. Cryptography and Security [cs.CR]. Université Côte d’Azur, 2018. English. NNT : 2018AZUR4085. tel-01925851v2 HAL Id: tel-01925851 https://hal.inria.fr/tel-01925851v2 Submitted on 15 Apr 2019 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. THÈSE DE DOCTORAT Sécurité et vie privée dans les applications web Dolière Francis Somé Université Côte d’Azur / Inria Présentée en vue de l’obtention du grade de docteur en Informatique d’Université Côte d’Azur Dirigée par : Tamara Rezk Co-encadrée par : Nataliia Bielova Soutenue le : 29 octobre 2018 Devant le jury, composé de : Davide Balzarotti Professeur Eurecom Nataliia Bielova Chercheur Inria Stefano Calzavara Chercheur Università Ca' Foscari Venezia Walid Dabbous Directeur de recherche Inria Christoph Kerschbaumer Chercheur Mozilla Nick Nikiforakis Professeur Assistant Stony Brook University Tamara Rezk Chercheur Inria Andrei Sabelfeld Professeur Chalmers University Mike West Ingénieur Google Sécurité et vie privée dans les applications web Composition du jury Rapporteurs : Davide Balzarotti Professeur Eurecom Andrei Sabelfeld Professeur Chalmers University Examinateurs : Stefano Calzavara Chercheur Università Ca' Foscari Venezia Walid Dabbous Directeur de recherche Inria Christoph Kerschbaumer Chercheur Mozilla Mike West Ingénieur Google Invité : Nick Nikiforakis Professeur Assistant Stony Brook University Co-directeur de thèse: Nataliia Bielova Chercheur Inria Directeur de thèse: Tamara Rezk Chercheur Inria Résumé Dans cette thèse, nous nous sommes intéressés aux problématiques de sécurité et de confidentialité liées à l’utilisation d’applications web et à l’installation d’extensions de navigateurs. Parmi les attaques dont sont victimes les applications web, il y a celles très connues de type XSS (ou Cross-Site Scripting). Les extensions sont des logiciels tiers que les utilisateurs peuvent installer afin de booster les fonctionnalités des navigateurs et améliorer leur expérience utilisateur. Content Security Policy (CSP) est une politique de sécurité qui a été proposée pour contrer les attaques de type XSS. La Same Origin Policy (SOP) est une politique de sécurité fondamentale des navigateurs, régissant les interactions entre applications web. Par exemple, elle ne permet pas qu’une application accède aux données d’une autre application. Cependant, le mécanisme de Cross-Origin Resource Sharing (CORS) peut être implémenté par des applications désirant échanger des données entre elles. Tout d’abord, nous avons étudié l’intégration de CSP avec la Same Origin Policy (SOP) et démontré que SOP peut rendre CSP inefficace, surtout quand une application web ne protège pas toutes ses pages avec CSP, et qu’une page avec CSP imbrique ou est imbriquée dans une autre page sans ou avec un CSP différent et inefficace. Nous avons aussi élucidé la sémantique de CSP, en particulier les différences entre ses 3 versions, et leurs implémentations dans les navigateurs. Nous avons ainsi introduit le concept de CSP sans dépendances qui assure à une application la même protection contre les attaques, quelque soit le navigateur dans lequel elle s’exécute. Finalement, nous avons proposé et démontré comment étendre CSP dans son état actuel, afin de pallier à nombre de ses limitations qui ont été révélées dans d’autres études. Les contenus tiers dans les applications web permettent aux propriétaires de ces contenus de pister les utilisateurs quand ils naviguent sur le web. Pour éviter cela, nous avons introduit une nouvelle architecture web qui une fois déployée, supprime le pistage des utilisateurs. Dans un dernier temps, nous nous sommes intéressés aux extensions de navigateurs. Nous avons d’abord démontré que les extensions qu’un utilisateur installe et/ou les applications web auxquelles il se connecte, peuvent le distinguer d’autres utilisateurs. Nous avons aussi étudié les interactions entre extensions et applications web. Ainsi avons-nous trouvé plusieurs extensions dont les privilèges peuvent être exploités par des sites web afin d’accéder à des données sensibles de l’utilisateur. Par exemple, certaines extensions permettent à des applications web d’accéder aux contenus d’autres applications, bien que cela soit normalement interdit par la Same Origin Policy. Finalement, nous avons aussi trouvé qu’un grand nombre d’extensions a la possibilité de désactiver la Same Origin Policy dans le navigateur, en manipulant les entêtes CORS. Cela permet à un attaquant d’accéder aux données de l’utilisateur dans n’importe qu’elle autre application, comme par example ses mails, son profile sur les réseaux sociaux, et bien plus. Pour lutter contre ces problèmes, nous préconisons aux navigateurs un système de permissions plus fin et une analyse d’extensions plus poussée, afin d’alerter les utilisateurs des dangers réels liés aux extensions. i ii Mots-clés : web, navigateurs, applications web, securité, same-rigin policy, content security policy, cross-origin resource sharing, extensions de navigateurs, communication inter-iframes, confidentialité, vie privée, pistage, empreinte de navigateurs Abstract In this thesis, we studied security and privacy threats in web applications and browser extensions. There are many attacks targeting the web of which XSS (Cross-Site Scripting) is one of the most notorious. Third party tracking is the ability of an attacker to benefit from its presence in many web applications in order to track the user has she browses the web, and build her browsing profile. Extensions are third party software that users install to extend their browser functionality and improve their browsing experience. Malicious or poorly programmed extensions can be exploited by attackers in web applications, in order to benefit from extensions privileged capabilities and access sensitive user information. Content Security Policy (CSP) is a security mechanism for mitigating the impact of content injection attacks in general and in particular XSS. The Same Origin Policy (SOP) is a security mechanism implemented by browsers to isolate web applications of different origins from one another. In a first work on CSP, we analyzed the interplay of CSP with SOP and demonstrated that the latter allows the former to be bypassed. Then we scrutinized the three CSP versions and found that a CSP is differently interpreted depending on the browser, the version of CSP it implements, and how compliant the implementation is with respect to the specification. To help developers deploy effective policies that encompass all these differences in CSP versions and browsers implementations, we proposed the deployment of dependency-free policies that effectively protect against attacks in all browsers. Finally, previous studies have identified many limitations of CSP. We reviewed the different solutions proposed in the wild, and showed that they do not fully mitigate the identified shortcomings of CSP. Therefore, we proposed to extend the CSP specification, and showed the feasibility of our proposals with an example of implementation. Regarding third party tracking, we introduced and implemented a tracking preserving ar- chitecture, that can be deployed by web developers willing to include third party content in their applications while preventing tracking. Intuitively, third party requests are auto- matically routed to a trusted middle party server which removes tracking information from the requests. Finally considering browser extensions, we first showed that the extensions that users install and the websites they are logged into, can serve to uniquely identify and track them. We then studied the communications between browser extensions and web applications and demonstrate that malicious or poorly programmed extensions can be exploited by web applications to benefit from extensions privileged capabilities. Also, we demonstrated that extensions can disable the Same Origin Policy by tampering with CORS headers. All this enables web applications to read sensitive user information. To mitigate these threats, we proposed countermeasures and a more fine-grained permissions system and review process for browser extensions. We believe that this can help browser vendors identify malicious extensions and warn users about the threats posed by extensions they install. iii iv Keywords: web, browser, web application, security, same origin policy, content secu- rity policy, cross-origin resource sharing, browser extensions, cross-iframe communication, privacy, third party web tracking, browser fingerprinting Acknowledgements MERCI THANK YOU BARKA v Contents 1 Introduction1 1 Security threats..................................1 2 Privacy threats..................................2 3 Extensible browsers................................3 4 Scope of the thesis................................3 4.1 Improving the effectiveness of CSP...................3 4.2 Server-side third party tracking protection...............4 4.3 Web applications meet browser extensions...............5
Load more

Recommended publications
  • On the Uniqueness of Browser Extensions and Web Logins
    To Extend or not to Extend: on the Uniqueness of Browser Extensions and Web Logins Gábor György Gulyás Dolière Francis Somé INRIA INRIA [email protected] [email protected] Nataliia Bielova Claude Castelluccia INRIA INRIA [email protected] [email protected] ABSTRACT shown that a user’s browser has a number of “physical” charac- Recent works showed that websites can detect browser extensions teristics that can be used to uniquely identify her browser and that users install and websites they are logged into. This poses sig- hence to track it across the Web. Fingerprinting of users’ devices is nificant privacy risks, since extensions and Web logins that reflect similar to physical biometric traits of people, where only physical user’s behavior, can be used to uniquely identify users on the Web. characteristics are studied. This paper reports on the first large-scale behavioral uniqueness Similar to previous demonstrations of user uniqueness based on study based on 16,393 users who visited our website. We test and their behavior [23, 50], behavioral characteristics, such as browser detect the presence of 16,743 Chrome extensions, covering 28% settings and the way people use their browsers can also help to of all free Chrome extensions. We also detect whether the user is uniquely identify Web users. For example, a user installs web connected to 60 different websites. browser extensions she prefers, such as AdBlock [1], LastPass [14] We analyze how unique users are based on their behavior, and find or Ghostery [8] to enrich her Web experience. Also, while brows- out that 54.86% of users that have installed at least one detectable ing the Web, she logs into her favorite social networks, such as extension are unique; 19.53% of users are unique among those who Gmail [13], Facebook [7] or LinkedIn [15].
    [Show full text]
  • Cisco Telepresence Management Suite 15.13.1
    Cisco TelePresence Management Suite 15.13.1 Software Release Notes First Published: June 2021 Cisco Systems, Inc. www.cisco.com 1 Contents Preface 3 Change History 3 Product Documentation 3 New Features in 15.13.1 3 Support for Cisco Meeting Server SIP recorder in Cisco TMS 3 Support for Cisco Webex Desk Limited Edition 3 Webex Room Panorama series to support 20000 kbps Bandwidth 3 Features in Previous Releases 3 Resolved and Open Issues 4 Limitations 4 Interoperability 8 Upgrading to 15.13.1 8 Before You Upgrade 8 Redundant Deployments 8 Upgrading from 14.4 or 14.4.1 8 Upgrading From a Version Earlier than 14.2 8 Prerequisites and Software Dependencies 8 Upgrade Instructions 8 Using the Bug Search Tool 9 Obtaining Documentation and Submitting a Service Request 9 Cisco Legal Information 10 Cisco Trademark 10 Cisco Systems, Inc. www.cisco.com 2 Cisco TelePresence Management Suite Software Release Notes Preface Change History Table 1 Software Release Notes Change History Date Change Reason June 2021 Release of Software Cisco TMS 15.13.1 Product Documentation The following documents provide guidance on installation, initial configuration, and operation of the product: ■ Cisco TelePresence Management Suite Installation and Upgrade Guide ■ Cisco TelePresence Management Suite Administrator Guide ■ Cisco TMS Extensions Deployment Guides New Features in 15.13.1 Support for Cisco Meeting Server SIP recorder in Cisco TMS Cisco TMS currently supports Cisco Meeting Server recording with XMPP by default. As XMPP is deprecated from Meeting Server 3.0 onwards, it will only support SIP recorder. For such Cisco Meeting Server with SIP recorder, the valid SIP Recorder URI details must be provided in Cisco TMS.
    [Show full text]
  • The Web Never Forgets: Persistent Tracking Mechanisms in the Wild
    The Web Never Forgets: Persistent Tracking Mechanisms in the Wild Gunes Acar1, Christian Eubank2, Steven Englehardt2, Marc Juarez1 Arvind Narayanan2, Claudia Diaz1 1KU Leuven, ESAT/COSIC and iMinds, Leuven, Belgium {name.surname}@esat.kuleuven.be 2Princeton University {cge,ste,arvindn}@cs.princeton.edu ABSTRACT 1. INTRODUCTION We present the first large-scale studies of three advanced web tracking mechanisms — canvas fingerprinting, evercookies A 1999 New York Times article called cookies compre­ and use of “cookie syncing” in conjunction with evercookies. hensive privacy invaders and described them as “surveillance Canvas fingerprinting, a recently developed form of browser files that many marketers implant in the personal computers fingerprinting, has not previously been reported in the wild; of people.” Ten years later, the stealth and sophistication of our results show that over 5% of the top 100,000 websites tracking techniques had advanced to the point that Edward employ it. We then present the first automated study of Felten wrote “If You’re Going to Track Me, Please Use Cook­ evercookies and respawning and the discovery of a new ev­ ies” [18]. Indeed, online tracking has often been described ercookie vector, IndexedDB. Turning to cookie syncing, we as an “arms race” [47], and in this work we study the latest present novel techniques for detection and analysing ID flows advances in that race. and we quantify the amplification of privacy-intrusive track­ The tracking mechanisms we study are advanced in that ing practices due to cookie syncing. they are hard to control, hard to detect and resilient Our evaluation of the defensive techniques used by to blocking or removing.
    [Show full text]
  • Do Not Track a Nokia Browser Look
    Do Not Track Nokia Browser Position - Vikram Malaiya Copyright: Nokia Corporation, 2011 Our understanding of Do Not Track (DNT) • DNT is a technology to enables users to opt out of third-party web tracking • No agreed upon definition of DNT. There are currently 3 major technology proposals for responding to third-party privacy concern. 1. Stanford University and Mozilla’s DNT HTTP Header technique. 2. Blacklist based technique such as Microsoft’s ‘Tracking Protection’ which is part of IE9 3. Network Advertising Initiative’s model of a per company opt-out cookie. Opt-out cookie approach is being promoted by Google. DNT as HTTP Header The Browser adds ‘DNT’/ ‘X-Do-Not-Track’ to its http header. The header is sent out to the server with every web request. This header acts as a signal to the server suggesting that the user wishes to opt out of tracking. Adoption: Firefox 4, IE9 DNT as HTTP Header • Pros: – Scope: Server could apply restrictions to all third party entities and tracking mechanisms – Persistent: No reconfiguration needed once set – Simple: Easy to implement on the browser side • Cons: – Only work as long as the server honors users preferences – No way to enforce national regulations/legislations to servers located beyond country boundaries Block(Black) List / Tracking Protection This is a consumer opt-in mechanism which blocks web connections from known tracking domains that are compiled on a list. First party Third party Adoption: ‘Tracking Protection’ in Internet Explorer 9 cy.analytix.com The downloadable Tracking allow Protection Lists enable IE9 xy.ads.com consumers to control what deny third-party site content can deny track them when they’re ads.tracker.com Tracking Protection online.
    [Show full text]
  • BUGS in the SYSTEM a Primer on the Software Vulnerability Ecosystem and Its Policy Implications
    ANDI WILSON, ROSS SCHULMAN, KEVIN BANKSTON, AND TREY HERR BUGS IN THE SYSTEM A Primer on the Software Vulnerability Ecosystem and its Policy Implications JULY 2016 About the Authors About New America New America is committed to renewing American politics, Andi Wilson is a policy analyst at New America’s Open prosperity, and purpose in the Digital Age. We generate big Technology Institute, where she researches and writes ideas, bridge the gap between technology and policy, and about the relationship between technology and policy. curate broad public conversation. We combine the best of With a specific focus on cybersecurity, Andi is currently a policy research institute, technology laboratory, public working on issues including encryption, vulnerabilities forum, media platform, and a venture capital fund for equities, surveillance, and internet freedom. ideas. We are a distinctive community of thinkers, writers, researchers, technologists, and community activists who Ross Schulman is a co-director of the Cybersecurity believe deeply in the possibility of American renewal. Initiative and senior policy counsel at New America’s Open Find out more at newamerica.org/our-story. Technology Institute, where he focuses on cybersecurity, encryption, surveillance, and Internet governance. Prior to joining OTI, Ross worked for Google in Mountain About the Cybersecurity Initiative View, California. Ross has also worked at the Computer The Internet has connected us. Yet the policies and and Communications Industry Association, the Center debates that surround the security of our networks are for Democracy and Technology, and on Capitol Hill for too often disconnected, disjointed, and stuck in an Senators Wyden and Feingold. unsuccessful status quo.
    [Show full text]
  • Reforming Vulnerability Disclosure Programs in the Private Sector
    Debugging the System: Reforming Vulnerability Disclosure Programs in the Private Sector Jasmine Arooni* TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................... 445 II. VULNERABILITY DISCLOSURE PROGRAMS IN PRACTICE: HOW DO THEY WORK? .............................................................................................. 448 III. THE CURRENT LEGAL LANDSCAPE: LEGAL RISKS FACED BY VDP SECURITY RESEARCHERS .................................................................. 450 A. The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and Its Impact on Security Research ..................................................................................... 451 B. The DMCA and Its Impact on Security Research ....................... 453 C. Safe Harbor Language: A Superficial Fix, Not a Complete Solution ....................................................................................... 454 IV. THE DOJ’S DISCRETIONARY GUIDANCE FOR PRIVATE VDPS ............. 455 V. THE U.S. GOVERNMENT’S INFLUENTIAL ROLE IN VDP GOVERNANCE .................................................................................................... 456 A. The U.S. Government as a “Crowdsourcer”: Validating the Importance of Public Engagement to Cybersecurity ................. 457 B. The U.S. Government as a “Rule Maker”: The DHS’ Compulsory Authority over Government VDPs .............................................. 458 C. The Government as an “Example”: The Impact of Government VDPs on the Private Sector, as Evidenced Through
    [Show full text]
  • Interfacing Apache HTTP Server 2.4 with External Applications
    Interfacing Apache HTTP Server 2.4 with External Applications Jeff Trawick Interfacing Apache HTTP Server 2.4 with External Applications Jeff Trawick November 6, 2012 Who am I? Interfacing Apache HTTP Server 2.4 with External Applications Met Unix (in the form of Xenix) in 1985 Jeff Trawick Joined IBM in 1990 to work on network software for mainframes Moved to a different organization in 2000 to work on Apache httpd Later spent about 4 years at Sun/Oracle Got tired of being tired of being an employee of too-huge corporation so formed my own too-small company Currently working part-time, coding on other projects, and taking classes Overview Interfacing Apache HTTP Server 2.4 with External Applications Jeff Trawick Huge problem space, so simplify Perspective: \General purpose" web servers, not minimal application containers which implement HTTP \Applications:" Code that runs dynamically on the server during request processing to process input and generate output Possible web server interactions Interfacing Apache HTTP Server 2.4 with External Applications Jeff Trawick Native code plugin modules (uhh, assuming server is native code) Non-native code + language interpreter inside server (Lua, Perl, etc.) Arbitrary processes on the other side of a standard wire protocol like HTTP (proxy), CGI, FastCGI, etc. (Java and \all of the above") or private protocol Some hybrid such as mod fcgid mod fcgid as example hybrid Interfacing Apache HTTP Server 2.4 with External Applications Jeff Trawick Supports applications which implement a standard wire protocol, no restriction on implementation mechanism Has extensive support for managing the application[+interpreter] processes so that the management of the application processes is well-integrated with the web server Contrast with mod proxy fcgi (pure FastCGI, no process management) or mod php (no processes/threads other than those of web server).
    [Show full text]
  • Rational Robot User's Guide
    Rational Software Corporation® Rational® Robot User’s Guide VERSION: 2003.06.00 PART NUMBER: 800-026172-000 WINDOWS [email protected] http://www.rational.com Legal Notices ©1998-2003, Rational Software Corporation. All rights reserved. Part Number: 800-026172-000 Version Number: 2003.06.00 This manual (the "Work") is protected under the copyright laws of the United States and/or other jurisdictions, as well as various international treaties. Any reproduction or distribution of the Work is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Rational Software Corporation. The Work is furnished under a license and may be used or copied only in accordance with the terms of that license. Unless specifically allowed under the license, this manual or copies of it may not be provided or otherwise made available to any other person. No title to or ownership of the manual is transferred. Read the license agreement for complete terms. Rational Software Corporation, Rational, Rational Suite, Rational Suite ContentStudio, Rational Apex, Rational Process Workbench, Rational Rose, Rational Summit, Rational Unified Process, Rational Visual Test, AnalystStudio, ClearCase, ClearCase Attache, ClearCase MultiSite, ClearDDTS, ClearGuide, ClearQuest, PerformanceStudio, PureCoverage, Purify, Quantify, Requisite, RequisitePro, RUP, SiteCheck, SiteLoad, SoDa, TestFactory, TestFoundation, TestMate and TestStudio are registered trademarks of Rational Software Corporation in the United States and are trademarks or registered trademarks in other countries. The Rational logo, Connexis, ObjecTime, Rational Developer Network, RDN, ScriptAssure, and XDE, among others, are trademarks of Rational Software Corporation in the United States and/or in other countries. All other names are used for identification purposes only and are trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective companies.
    [Show full text]
  • Write Once, Pwn Anywhere
    Write Once, Pwn Anywhere Yang Yu Twitter: @tombkeeper Agenda • Summon BSTR back • JScript 9 mojo • “Vital Point Strike” • “Interdimensional Execution” Who am I? • From Beijing, China • Director of Xuanwu Security Lab at Tencent – We're hiring • Researcher from 2002, geek from birth – Strong focus on exploiting and detection • Before 2002, I am a… Before 2002 Now Summon BSTR back About BSTR JScript 5.8 and earlier use BSTR to store String object data struct BSTR { LONG length; WCHAR* str; } var str = “AAAAAAAA”; 0:016> dc 120d0020 l 8 120d0020 00000010 00410041 00410041 00410041 ....A.A.A.A.A.A. 120d0030 00410041 00000000 00000000 00000000 A.A............. Corrupt BSTR prefix var str = “AAAAAAAA”; 0:016> dc 120d0020 l 4 120d0020 00000010 00410041 00410041 00410041 ....A.A.A.A.A.A. writeByVul(0x120d0020, 0x7ffffff0); 0:016> dc 120d0020 l 4 120d0020 7ffffff0 00410041 00410041 00410041 ....A.A.A.A.A.A. var outofbounds = str.substr(0x22222200,4); * Peter Vreugdenhil, “Pwn2Own 2010 Windows 7 Internet Explorer 8 exploit” Locate the address of BSTR prefix var strArr = heapSpray("\u0000"); var sprayedAddr = 0x14141414; writeByVul(sprayedAddr); for (i = 0; i < strArr.length; i++) { p = strArr[i].search(/[^\u0000]/); if (p != -1) { modified = i; leverageStr = strArr[modified]; bstrPrefixAddr = sprayedAddr - (p)*2 - 4; break; } } * Fermin J. Serna, “The info leak era on software exploitation” JScript 9 replaced JScript 5.8 since IE 9 JScript 9 does not use BSTR now So exploiters switch to flash vector object But, JScript 5.8 is still there We can summon it back The spell to summon JScript 5.8 back <META http-equiv = "X-UA-Compatible" content = "IE=EmulateIE8"/> <Script Language = "JScript.Encode"> … </Script> or <META http-equiv = "X-UA-Compatible" content = "IE=EmulateIE8"/> <Script Language = "JScript.Compact"> … </Script> * Some features are not supported with JScript.Compact, like eval().
    [Show full text]
  • A Dropbox Whitepaper Dropbox for Business Security
    Dropbox for Business security A Dropbox whitepaper Dropbox for Business security Contents Introduction 3 Product features (security, control, and visibility) 3 Under the hood 7 Application security 10 Apps for Dropbox 12 Network security 13 Vulnerability management 14 Dropbox information security 16 Physical security 17 Compliance 17 Privacy 19 Dropbox Trust Program 20 Summary 21 Dropbox for Business security Millions of users trust Dropbox to easily and reliably store, sync, and share photos, videos, docs, and other files across devices. Dropbox for Business brings that same simplicity to the workplace, with advanced features that help teams share instantly across their organizations and give admins the visibility and control they need. But more than just an easy-to-use tool for storage and sharing, Dropbox for Business is designed to keep important work files secure. To do this, we’ve created a sophisticated infrastructure onto which account administrators can layer and customize policies of their own. In this paper, we’ll detail the back-end policies, as well as options available to admins, that make Dropbox the secure tool for getting work done. Product features (security, control, and visibility) Dropbox provides the administrative control and visibility features that empower both IT and end users to effectively manage their businesses and data. Below is a sampling of features available to team admins and users, as well as third-party integrations for managing core IT processes. Admin management features No two organizations are exactly alike, so we’ve developed a number of tools that empower admins to customize Dropbox for Business to their teams’ particular needs.
    [Show full text]
  • Statement of Justin Brookman Director, Consumer Privacy Center for Democracy & Technology Before the U.S. Senate Committee O
    Statement of Justin Brookman Director, Consumer Privacy Center for Democracy & Technology Before the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation Hearing on “A Status Update on the Development of Voluntary Do-Not-Track Standards” April 24, 2013 Chairman Rockefeller, Ranking Member Thune, and Members of the Committee: On behalf of the Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT), I thank you for the opportunity to testify today. We applaud the leadership the Chairman has demonstrated in examining the challenges in developing a consensus Do Not Track standard and appreciate the opportunity to address the continued insufficiency of self-regulatory consumer privacy protections. CDT is a non-profit, public interest organization dedicated to preserving and promoting openness, innovation, and freedom on the decentralized Internet. I currently serve as the Director of CDT’s Consumer Privacy Project. I am also an active participant in the Worldwide Web Consortium’s Tracking Protection Working Group, where I serve as editor of the “Tracking Compliance and Scope” specification — the document that purports to define what Do Not Track should mean. My testimony today will briefly describe the history of online behavioral advertising and the genesis of the Do Not Track initiative. I will then describe the current state of the World Wide Web Consortium’s efforts to create Do Not Track standards and the challenges going forward to implement Do Not Track tools successfully. I will conclude with my thoughts on the future of Do Not Track. and why I believe that this protracted struggle demonstrates the need for the fundamental reform of our nation’s privacy protection framework for commercial and government collection and use of personal information.
    [Show full text]
  • X Content Security Policy Web Config
    X Content Security Policy Web Config Volar Odin still misforms: wonted and tenable Paddie redrives quite absolutely but come-on her quadricentennial grandly. Cyprian and adiabatic Schroeder always chap vulgarly and annul his pulsimeters. Kyle tumefying brusquely while corollaceous Ron cudgellings decorative or knell immanently. Thanks admin if some prefer to use a look something else is because the content security policy to keep abreast of security web Content Security Policy KeyCDN Support. The X-Frame-Options XFO security header helps modern web browsers. Content-Security-Policy Header CSP Reference & Examples. Content Security Policy CSP is a security mechanism that helps protect against. Learn guide to install integrate and configure CKEditor 5 Builds and have to. HTTP Strict Transport Security HSTS allows web servers to declare. Firefox is using X-Content-Security-Policy and Webkit Chrome Safari are using. To junk is configure your web server to furniture the Content-Security-Policy HTTP header. Content Security Policy CSP allows you to film what resources are allowed to. Manage Content Security Policy from Episerver CMS Gosso. CLI Reference FortiADC 600 Fortinet Documentation Library. In case in need off more relaxed content security policy for example although you. More snow more web apps configure secured endpoints and are redirecting. This is dependent because XSS bugs have two characteristics which make combat a particularly serious threat in the security of web applications XSS is ubiquitous. CSP is intended to propose an additional layer of security against cross-site scripting and other malicious web-based attacks CSP is implemented as a HTTP response. Always the Content-Security-Policy.
    [Show full text]