2 ms·
I can only imagine the possible security exploits available by passing AST binaries directly to the browser, rather than letting the JS lexer/tokenizer and comp
by twistedpair 11y ago
I can only imagine the possible security exploits available by passing AST binaries directly to the browser, rather than letting the JS lexer/tokenizer and compiler enforce language rules from the source.
- jfbastien 11y agoThe wasm AST is also a language, and a very simple one at that. Much easier to test and fuzz than all-out JS.
- robbrown451 11y agoLuckily, the designers of WebAssembly imagined those things before you.
- lisivka 11y agoThat's true of version 1, but supporting arbitrary JavaScript is on the roadmap.