<?xml version="1.0"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">
		<id>https://wiki.owasp.org/api.php?action=feedcontributions&amp;feedformat=atom&amp;user=Mvanhulsentop</id>
		<title>OWASP - User contributions [en]</title>
		<link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="https://wiki.owasp.org/api.php?action=feedcontributions&amp;feedformat=atom&amp;user=Mvanhulsentop"/>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.owasp.org/index.php/Special:Contributions/Mvanhulsentop"/>
		<updated>2026-04-29T19:17:36Z</updated>
		<subtitle>User contributions</subtitle>
		<generator>MediaWiki 1.27.2</generator>

	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.owasp.org/index.php?title=Talk:Clickjacking_Defense_Cheat_Sheet&amp;diff=232491</id>
		<title>Talk:Clickjacking Defense Cheat Sheet</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.owasp.org/index.php?title=Talk:Clickjacking_Defense_Cheat_Sheet&amp;diff=232491"/>
				<updated>2017-08-22T13:39:08Z</updated>
		
		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Mvanhulsentop: Added question about adding a piece on frame-src&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
== Javascript based solution : are they good now ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Considering the fact that people can disable javascript in framed page should we be recommending Javascript based solution for Clickjacking or we should all bet for just XFO.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I can understand this (javascript based solution) could be a good option when the site can't function without javascript enabled however any site which has script enabled just for this feature can again be victimized using iframe property like sandbox=&amp;quot;allow-forms allow-scripts&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
--[[User:Anant Shrivastava|Anant Shrivastava]] ([[User talk:Anant Shrivastava|talk]]) 01:48, 22 June 2014 (CDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== The section related to nested frames sounds confusing. ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In the limitations, nested frames paragraph sounds confusing. Is there any mistake there?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Nested Frames don't work with SAMEORIGIN and ALLOW-FROM In the following situation, the http://framed.invalid/child frame does not load because ALLOW-FROM applies to the top-level browsing context, not that of the immediate parent. The solution is to use ALLOW-FROM in both the parent and child frames (but this prevents the child frame loading if the //framed.invalid/parent page is loaded as the top level document).&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Grandchild frame does not use ALLOW-FROM. It uses SAMEORIGIN. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/ieinternals/2010/03/30/combating-clickjacking-with-x-frame-options/&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== The relation between frame-src and frame-ancestors is sometimes confusing ==&lt;br /&gt;
The relation between frame-src and frame-ancestors is sometimes confusing. Should the difference be mentioned, or is mentioning frame-src in the context of Clickjacking adding to the confusion?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I'd like to add a piece where it is stated that the two directives are not the same and where it is stated that the frame-src is about nested iframes in the page in question. Therefor it is not clickjacking related.  &lt;br /&gt;
--Maarten van Hulsentop&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Mvanhulsentop</name></author>	</entry>

	</feed>