Subject: [websec] I-D Action: draft-ietf-websec-x-frame-options-02.txt

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 11:04:58 -0800

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
 This draft is a work item of the Web Security Working Group of the IETF.

	Title           : HTTP Header Field X-Frame-Options
	Author(s)       : David Ross
                          Tobias Gondrom
	Filename        : draft-ietf-websec-x-frame-options-02.txt
	Pages           : 11
	Date            : 2013-02-25

Abstract:
   To improve the protection of web applications against Clickjacking,
   this specification describes the X-Frame-Options HTTP response header
   field that declares a policy communicated from the server to the
   client browser on whether the browser may display the transmitted
   content in frames that are part of other web pages.  This
   informational document serves to document the existing use and
   specification of this X-Frame-Options HTTP response header field.

The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-websec-x-frame-options

There's also a htmlized version available at:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-websec-x-frame-options-02

A diff from the previous version is available at:
http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-websec-x-frame-options-02

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

---

From: Tobias Gondrom <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 17:43:12 +0800

Hi all,

<hat="individual">

just a quick update on the status of the informational X-Frame-Options
draft.
First, let me thank everyone for the great reviews and feedback and
apologize for not posting the revised draft earlier. Was a little bit
occupied with other work items and also wanted to give enough time to
thoroughly incorporate all your feedback.

I am very grateful for your reviews and feedback and went through all
the emails and incorporated every bit of review feedback you gave me (in
some cases I received feedback from more than one person on an
individual paragraph in which case I chose the proposals that seemed the
best fit to me).

The revision includes the WGLC feedback from Adam, Alexey, Barry, Brad,
Dave, Jeff, Julian, Mark, Peter and Yoav. And I think it significantly
improved the quality of the draft which was before the WGLC still with a
few typos and not clearly to understand sentences. I hope the revision
does not reflect a good improvement.

Personally, I do not think this update made any major changes to the
draft, especially as it is only documenting what is out there anyway. So
whether we want to re-initiate a second WGLC or submit this to the IESG
for LC, will be up to you and my co-chair Yoav and potentially Alexey
(if he still volunteering to play I-D shepherd for this doc).

Best regards, Tobias

On 26/02/13 03:04, [email-masked] wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> websec mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/websec