I was thinking more about the default behavior. But if security is inconvenient, no one will adopt it.
-
-
FWs will want to *work* when developers "turn on" security features. So they will work around them. Simple.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
And if they do they will be wrong, and detrimental to user security. Luckily it's a fixable problem.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
is ng-csp detrimental to user security?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Yes, the Angular security model based on bypassing platform security features (via {{ }} and AST*) is wrong
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
OK, and how would you have done ng-csp differently?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
I'll bite: if your JS FW bypasses platform restrictions you either fail closed or reimplement them yourself.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @arturjanc @sirdarckcat and
So for Angular, just don't implement ASTInterpreter or require nonces/hashes for expressions.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
If they hadn't implemented it, authors wouldn't have been able to use CSP. How is this different?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @sirdarckcat @arturjanc and
I don't think ng-csp did any "harm" to users. On the contrary, it allowed authors to adopt (a version of) CSP.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
am I missing something here? ng-csp broke CSP, and it broke it even for websites without Angular
-
-
-
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.