3 ms·
It’s basic self defense. Who runs around the web in 2026 allowing random JS? Might as well be licking seats on the subway.
by lazide 5mo ago
It’s basic self defense. Who runs around the web in 2026 allowing random JS? Might as well be licking seats on the subway.
- lmm 5mo agoIf you trust your browser it's fine, and if you don't then both CSS and SVG are significantly more risky.
- sysguest 5mo ago> then both CSS and SVG are significantly more risky. how???
- margalabargala 5mo agoThis isn't true at all. Anything SVG does maliciously, it does by containing JavaScript, so SVG's worst case is a subset of JS's.
- fc417fc802 5mo agoRemind me again what the ratio of browser sandbox escapes coupled with full RCE is between JS, CSS, and SVG?
- Telaneo 5mo ago> Who runs around the web in 2026 allowing random JS? Within a rounding error, 100% of people on the internet.
- lazide 5mo agoIt’s a lot higher pct when you count vpns with JS filtering, ad blockers, etc.
- Telaneo 5mo agoEven then, they're using disallow lists. If you go on a random web page with novel JS, then that'll still be run. The only people working of allow lists are the people running NoScript and the like, and those truly aren't running random JS. But those people are a rounding error compared to the greater internet.