The methods on navigator are, but the interface object seems to be unconditional... Since this is all nonstandard stuff, I would prefer we either not expose the interface object at all or expose it only when the methods are exposed. Sound reasonable? jonas, who owns this stuff?

I put a full proposal in bug 900241 comment 52. I hope that answers the question here?

Yes. Sounds like the interface object should be conditioned on the same thing as the methods. Who's going to own that?

Don't know. We're terribly short on gecko engineers in B2G :(

Comment on attachment 8546023 [details] [diff] [review] Hide the DeviceStorage interface object in cases when the corresponding navigator APIs are hidden Review of attachment 8546023 [details] [diff] [review]: ----------------------------------------------------------------- This API also requires a permission to be used. We should use that to guard these interfaces too. But this patch is a step in the right direction.