3 ms·
For now wasm does not have any more risk than obfuscated JS. It is possible that there are a lot of tool to examine JS code for "suspicious code" and that thos
by afiori 3y ago
For now wasm does not have any more risk than obfuscated JS.
It is possible that there are a lot of tool to examine JS code for "suspicious code" and that those tools might not work well on WASM.
In practice the WASM interpreter in the browser is a functionality that can be (almost) completely polyfilled.
Personally I would be way more worries about hardware exploits via WebGL.
- afiori 3y agoAlso it is likely that the browser debugger will be less feturefull for wasm and that future multithreaded support will make obfuscation even easier. But it is probably already possible with JSFuck and webworkers.