-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Talk proposal: cookies_same_site_protection :lax or :strict which is better and why? #198
Comments
Hey There, if 10min or less, would you be interested in doing it this month on the 29th? |
@Dipesh8Bhatta heya, any news on that? would you want to do it next week? |
Hi Kevin,
I am out of the country at the moment.
I will reach you out when I am back.
Thanks,
Dipesh
…On Mon, May 22, 2023, 9:53 AM Kevin Garcia-F ***@***.***> wrote:
@Dipesh8Bhatta <https://github.com/Dipesh8Bhatta> heya, any news on that?
whould you want to do it next week?
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#198 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABSFSQP4H6QZJHPXJ7OVLPLXHKTINANCNFSM6AAAAAAUF46VHY>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
From Rails 6.1, Rails.application.config.action_dispatch.cookies_same_site_protection has been added to it. It has :lax, :strict and :none as options.
I believe :lax is as good as :strict in the context of security and in top of this :lax provides good user experience. I would like someone to discuss on this matter. And explain that :lax is not less in protecting cross-origin request than :strict.
I have read in medium: https://lilyreile.medium.com/rails-6-1-new-framework-defaults-what-they-do-and-how-to-safely-uncomment-them-c546b70f0c5e and couple of other sites about it.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: