Longer term, I think we should consider putting all
synchronously-accessible realms in the same compartment which would mean
content never observed a transparent wrapper. (There are important
security/testing/defense-in-depth questions to answer here, but iirc, there
are reasonable answers.) Unf
Right, and we don't even need to throw: type testing just fails when we try
to unbox anyref and we get a failed downcast; other ref types can't cross
the JS->wasm boundary at all at the moment. So it's literally zero effort
to deal with this now, I'm more worried about the longer term.
--lars
On
You're right that, to correctly handle transparent wrappers, wasm would
have to do a lot of work to deal with them (they can't simply be unwrapped)
and I agree that we don't want to do that.
After Jan's work, the only case where normal Web content would see
transparent wrappers would be the case w
I don't know enough about wrappers yet to have a definite opinion, but it's
my understanding that if I encounter a wrapper I can't just unwrap the
value and pass the resulting pointer on and let it escape unwrapped back
into content. If that is so, then we have a problem, because it means that
pot
I don't think we're anywhere close to a point where transparent wrappers
(js::CrossCompartmentWrapper) will go away, or can be ignored by SM devs.
Even after Jan's changes, we'll still use them for lots of things
(including Chrome->Content XrayWaivers).
For stuff that's super edge-casey, it may be
Thanks. Same-origin should be plenty good for what I'm doing.
In the mean time, trapping / throwing when attempting to unbox an anyref
that needs to be unwrapped is probably fine.
--lars
On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 11:05 AM, Jan de Mooij wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 10:47 AM, Lars Hansen wrote
On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 10:47 AM, Lars Hansen wrote:
> So: what's the story, and what's the status?
>
Bug 1357862 will eliminate a lot of wrappers (it requires some Gecko
changes still before we can enable it), but it will only get rid of
same-origin wrappers at first. There has been some discuss
7 matches
Mail list logo
