Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by astrosi 1601 days ago
In that in the browser you are able to see that you have gotten a 301/302 response but can't see where the redirect would have sent you.
1 comments

Oh right, because they don’t want cross-site scripts to be able to see redirected URLs since they could contain secrets. I wish we could completely do away with cross-site scripts and just have nice things!
Yea, so instead it would just encourage more 3rd party libraries doing random things on your site. This is what happens in native. Instead of embedding an ad in an iframe and isolating its damage you embed your ad service's library in your code and it spies on way more activity than it ever could otherwise.
It's pretty funny that such an RPC framework as the browser exists that gives the end user a genuinely decent sandbox, yet all it receives is criticism for its flaws. People will then happily install a screen dimmer or "productivity" tool with superuser privileges from a completely untrusted source.
I would also be okay (ish) with explicitly isolated third-party code execution, like your example of an iframe to a different domain. I'm pretty sure that should already be the case with iframes, in fact (you obviously shouldn't be able to embed an iframe to facebook.com on your website and then use your website's JavaScript to inspect the DOM on that facebook.com iframe).