- From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2013 01:05:18 -0700
- To: Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>
- Cc: Domenic Denicola <domenic@domenicdenicola.com>, Allen Wirfs-Brock <allen@wirfs-brock.com>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>, Rick Waldron <waldron.rick@gmail.com>, Adam Klein <adamk@chromium.org>, Ojan Vafai <ojan@chromium.org>, Brendan Eich <brendan@secure.meer.net>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, "rafaelw@chromium.org" <rafaelw@chromium.org>, Alex Russell <slightlyoff@chromium.org>, "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>, "Mark S. Miller" <erights@google.com>
> On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 5:53 PM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote: >> On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 1:15 PM, Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com> wrote: >>> Right, that's why the example in my first email is XSS: >>> >>> ---8<--- >>> var firstName = [...]; >>> var lastName = [...]; >>> header.innerHTML = `<h1>Welcome ${ firstName } ${ lastName }!</h1>`; >>> --->8--- >> >> It's hard to say if the blame for this is with quasis or with >> .innerHTML though. I.e. would not having quasis cause people to use >> your AST based template system, or would they just use string >> concatenation? > > I don't think it's that important to assign blame. There's plenty of > evidence that developers are very happy with AST-based solutions when > done well. For example, many, many developers use prepared statements > for SQL and Haml for HTML. Without knowing where the problem lies, it's hard to say that the proposed solutions are going to be effective. >> Indeed, since string templates don't even need to return strings, you could do >> >> header.appendChild(htmlel`<h1>Welcome ${ firstName } ${ lastName }!</h1>`); >> >> where `htmlel` just returns an HTML element constructed using that same algorithm (instead of the `outerHTML` of that element). >> >> At this point it seems like you are bikeshedding over `@` vs. `htmlel` or `{}` vs. `${}`, which leads me to believe I must be missing your argument, especially since you emphasize you're not wedded to ES4H and thus presumably not wedded to `@` or `{}`. > > I don't care at all about the syntax. If you want to keep backtick as > the operator, that's fine. What's important to me are the following: > > 1) The template system parses the trusted template content separately > from the untrusted input data. In particular, it should fill the > untrusted data into the leaves of AST produced by parsing the template > rather than parsing the untrusted data. > > 2) The template system does the above by default. > > Specifically, I would be perfectly happy with the following syntax: > > header.appendChild(`<h1>Welcome ${ firstName } ${ lastName }!</h1>`); > > as long as this "hello, world" template is not XSS. Note that quasis would fulfill that requirement as long as there is no default quasi. I.e. as long as: `foo ${ x }` is a syntax error but html`foo ${ x }` is not. But it's unclear to me if you'll be able to convince people that string templates are evil in enough contexts that they should be abandoned. / Jonas
Received on Monday, 11 March 2013 08:06:16 UTC