On 8 November 2011 20:29, Andreas Rossberg <[email protected]> wrote: > On 8 November 2011 18:47, David Bruant <[email protected]> wrote: >> "Given that direct proxies are not in a position to violate any of the >> *non-configurability or non-extensibility constraints* of their wrapped >> target, it should be safe to replace an existing normal object by a >> direct proxy wrapping that object." >> My understanding is that regarding the issue you mention, you cannot do >> more with startTrapping than redefining built-ins by (re)setting a property. > > That may be true for plain objects, but I think the situation is quite > different for functions, because there is no equivalent to > "non-configurable" for the [[Call]] and [[Construct]] properties.
BTW, a similar issue applies to getters and setters: even if a property is non-configurable, as long as it is defined by accessors an attacker could attach to the underlying JS functions and thereby essentially redefine the property without actually modifying it. /Andreas _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
