15 points terrybyte 1 hour ago 10 comments
aetherspawn 30 minutes ago | parent
It’s ridiculous that the answer to a secure web is for everyone to sprinkle the magic salt and not something on the browser side
rackcrunch 8 minutes ago | parent
Referrer-Policy shows it can work. When the header is missing, browsers fall back to strict-origin-when-cross-origin. 86.6% of the sites we scanned don't send it, and we didn't count that as a failure for that reason. The other headers don't have a safe default like that yet.
GaProgMan 24 minutes ago | parent
And if any of the websites use .NET, they can get almost all of the recommended security headers in one line by using a NuGet package I created: https://gaprogman.github.io/OwaspHeaders.Core/
stargrazer 11 minutes ago | parent
So.. you've written up what you checked, and what didn't match what ever criteria you had.
But.. what does it mean? Why enforce certain headers? Why enforce certain options? There is a section which kinda looks at this, but not really.
You have a bunch of links at the end for resources, but why not just provide the rationale for each rule or option inclusion in the article as well? What does each prevent or allow and why?
fitsumbelay 10 minutes ago | parent
for static sites on a VPS it's fair to expect the host to provision these, yes?