- From: Mike West <mkwst@google.com>
- Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 09:56:50 +0200
- To: Keiji Takeda <tkeiji@w3.org>
- Cc: Joel Weinberger <jww@google.com>, "public-webappsec@w3.org" <public-webappsec@w3.org>
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 7:32 PM, Keiji Takeda <tkeiji@w3.org> wrote: > Even though such large number of XSS exist the reason of not being exploited > is that in most cases it is not so useful from attacker's point of view with > its limited access to credentials (cookie or sessionIDs those are basically > temporal use). As noted below, I hope the current design already mitigates this risk by removing direct JavaScript access to the password. We can further harden this by skipping the ServiceWorker as well, though I'm not sure that's necessary. > now I noticed that if "object.toSource()" or "JSON.stringfy() " can apply > for PasswordCredential objects attackers would have access to the password > data. (I am not sure if there is any way to prohibit such access or if it > is already taken into account.) Neither of these should be a risk; the password information is stored in an internal "slot" in the JavaScript object. There isn't any getter that's web-accessible, and serialization of the object won't reveal its internal implementation details. In an idealized future, this should allow multi-process browsers like Chrome to avoid sending the password down to a renderer process at all, which I'm excited about. :) > To me it seems better to have some safty mechanism to introduce this API. > (e.g. require CSP as preriquisite etc.) What baseline CSP would you suggest? The spec currently suggests `connect-src` in order to further lock down the acceptable endpoints for `send()`. What else do you see as relevant? -- Mike West <mkwst@google.com>, @mikewest Google Germany GmbH, Dienerstrasse 12, 80331 München, Germany, Registergericht und -nummer: Hamburg, HRB 86891, Sitz der Gesellschaft: Hamburg, Geschäftsführer: Graham Law, Christine Elizabeth Flores (Sorry; I'm legally required to add this exciting detail to emails. Bleh.)
Received on Thursday, 28 May 2015 07:57:39 UTC