←back to thread

1208 points jamesberthoty | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
codemonkey-zeta ◴[] No.45261026[source]
I'm coming to the unfortunate realizattion that supply chain attacks like this are simply baked into the modern JavaScript ecosystem. Vendoring can mitigate your immediate exposure, but does not solve this problem.

These attacks may just be the final push I needed to take server rendering (without js) more seriously. The HTMX folks convinced me that I can get REALLY far without any JavaScript, and my apps will probably be faster and less janky anyway.

replies(18): >>45261086 #>>45261121 #>>45261140 #>>45261165 #>>45261220 #>>45261265 #>>45261285 #>>45261457 #>>45261571 #>>45261702 #>>45261970 #>>45262601 #>>45262619 #>>45262851 #>>45267210 #>>45268405 #>>45269073 #>>45273081 #
jeswin ◴[] No.45261970[source]
Traditional JS is actually among the safest environments ever created. Every day, billions of devices run untrusted JS code, and no other platform has seen sandboxed execution at such scale. And in nearly three decades, there have been very few incidents of large successful attacks on browser engines. That makes the JS engine derived from browsers the perfect tool to build a server side framework out of.

However, processes and practices around NodeJS and npm are in dire need of a security overhaul. leftpad is a cultural problem that needs to be addressed. To start with, snippets don't need to be on npm.

replies(6): >>45262184 #>>45262208 #>>45262220 #>>45262223 #>>45262238 #>>45264048 #
WD-42 ◴[] No.45262220[source]
Javascript doesn't have a standard library, until it does the 170 million[1] weekly downloads of packages like UUID will continue. You can't expect people to re-write everything over and over.

[1]https://www.npmjs.com/package/uuid

replies(5): >>45262335 #>>45262791 #>>45263174 #>>45263227 #>>45264429 #
simiones ◴[] No.45263174[source]
That's not the problem. There is a cultural (and partly technical) aversion in JavaScript to large libraries - this is where the issue comes from. So, instead of having something like org.apache.commons in Java or Boost in C++ or Posix in C, larger libraries that curate a bunch of utilities missing from the standard library, you get an uncountable number of small standalone libraries.

I would bet that you'll find a third party `leftpad` implementation in org.apache.commons or in Spring or in some other collection of utils in Java. The difference isn't the need for 3rd party software to fix gaps in the standard library - it's the preference for hundreds of small dependencies instead of one or two larger ones.

replies(2): >>45264977 #>>45268119 #
knert ◴[] No.45264977[source]
1000% agree. Javascript is weak in this regard if you compare it to major programming languages. It just adds unnecessary security risks not having a language with built in imports for common things like making API calls out or parsing JSON, for example.
replies(1): >>45268156 #
1. anon7000 ◴[] No.45268156[source]
It does have functions for that, “fetch” and “JSON.parse,” available in most JS runtimes.