Skip to content

Conversation

@stephanwlee
Copy link
Contributor

frame-ancestors is more modern way of doing x-frame-options which
TensorBoard did not set before and defaulted to allow. We, here, want to
explicitly allow all hosts to iframe TensorBoard inside since we have a
usecase like Jupyter notebooks.

frame-ancestors is more modern way of doing x-frame-options which
TensorBoard did not set before and defaulted to allow. We, here, want to
explicitly allow all hosts to iframe TensorBoard inside since we have a
usecase like Jupyter notebooks.
@stephanwlee stephanwlee merged commit 26d212a into tensorflow:master Oct 18, 2019
@stephanwlee stephanwlee deleted the frame branch October 18, 2019 21:20
stephanwlee pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 17, 2020
This PR essentially reverses #2797.

Currently this doesn't work because the `frame-ancestors *` directive prevents VS Code from framing TensorBoard. This is because VS Code is an Electron application, and Electron appears to be unable to frame websites which set `frame-ancestors *` in its response headers: electron/electron#26369

If I'm reading the CSP specification correctly, omitting the frame-ancestors directive altogether is equivalent to setting `frame-ancestors *`, so to my knowledge this PR should not result in a behavior change for environments which correctly implement the CSP spec. From https://w3c.github.io/webappsec-csp/2/#directive-frame-ancestors:

> The term allowed frame ancestors refers to the result of parsing the frame-ancestors directive’s value as a source list. If a frame-ancestors directive is not explicitly included in the policy, then allowed frame ancestors is "*".
wchargin pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 14, 2021
This PR essentially reverses #2797.

Currently this doesn't work because the `frame-ancestors *` directive prevents VS Code from framing TensorBoard. This is because VS Code is an Electron application, and Electron appears to be unable to frame websites which set `frame-ancestors *` in its response headers: electron/electron#26369

If I'm reading the CSP specification correctly, omitting the frame-ancestors directive altogether is equivalent to setting `frame-ancestors *`, so to my knowledge this PR should not result in a behavior change for environments which correctly implement the CSP spec. From https://w3c.github.io/webappsec-csp/2/#directive-frame-ancestors:

> The term allowed frame ancestors refers to the result of parsing the frame-ancestors directive’s value as a source list. If a frame-ancestors directive is not explicitly included in the policy, then allowed frame ancestors is "*".
wchargin added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 14, 2021
Backport of #4332 to 2.4. Cf. #4547.

---

This PR essentially reverses #2797.

Currently this doesn't work because the `frame-ancestors *` directive prevents VS Code from framing TensorBoard. This is because VS Code is an Electron application, and Electron appears to be unable to frame websites which set `frame-ancestors *` in its response headers: electron/electron#26369

If I'm reading the CSP specification correctly, omitting the frame-ancestors directive altogether is equivalent to setting `frame-ancestors *`, so to my knowledge this PR should not result in a behavior change for environments which correctly implement the CSP spec. From https://w3c.github.io/webappsec-csp/2/#directive-frame-ancestors:

> The term allowed frame ancestors refers to the result of parsing the frame-ancestors directive’s value as a source list. If a frame-ancestors directive is not explicitly included in the policy, then allowed frame ancestors is "*".

Co-authored-by: Joyce Er <joyceerhuiling@gmail.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants