ktmud commented on pull request #11617: URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-superset/pull/11617#issuecomment-726204489
> @ktmud The intention is the prevent security issues like [CVE-2020-13948](https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2020-13948). We should absolutely move away from exposing class objects to the Jinja context, but this doesn't prevent access to Python internals. We're relying heavily on Jijna's [Sandboxing](https://jinja.palletsprojects.com/en/2.11.x/sandbox/) to prevent RCE, which feels very brittle. I think CVE-2020-13948 has the same root cause as the other security bug we had, which is exposing class objects or modules that allow unsafe chained access to things we don't want to expose. As long as we stop doing that, is there anything else we should worry about? A lot of OSS use Jinja as their template engine, including Airflow and [dbt](https://docs.getdbt.com/docs/building-a-dbt-project/jinja-macros/), is there anything we can learn from them to make Jinja more secure? ---------------------------------------------------------------- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
