On Sun, Mar 28, 2021 at 08:43:22PM -0400, Karl Dahlke wrote:
> This with regard to sharing classes and methods in the master window.
>
> As mentioned, we put a class or method or constant there, we have to know it
> can't be tampered with.
> Do this.
>
> Object.defineProperty(mw$,
> "blah",{enumerable:false,writable:false,configurable:false});
>
> Not just what we put in the master window, but the methods we put in the
> prototypes in the classes in the master window,
> and the prototype objects themselves. All of it.
> There.
>
> But what stops them from adding something nefarious?
> Nothing.
> But we can detect it.
> After every browse, and after every js function, in jSideEffects(),
> I could call a master window tamper check method
> that would get all the keys in the master window, and all the keys in the
> prototypes of our classes,
> and count them, and make sure no new ones were added.
> See the latest commit which uses GetOwnPropertyNames() to do this.
> So we could detect tampering, and if discovered, turn off javascript for the
> duration of the edbrowse program.
> It's ugly to implement, the solution is a bit drastic, but it would be secure,
> and would guard against something that almost certainly would never happen.
>
Tbh, I'm wondering whether the memory savings etc are worth the sharing at
this point. There's part of me thinking to simply not have a master window
and pay the penalty that way rather than having to do something ugly like
this. Particularly as I've performance concerns with this (also with the
idea of not sharing classes but I *think* that'd be less problematic). Just
another thought.
Cheers,
Adam.
