←back to thread

394 points saeedesmaili | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.199s | source
Show context
gejose ◴[] No.45308131[source]
This is one way to look at it, but ignores the fact that most users use third party community plugins.

Obsidian has a truly terrible security model for plugins. As I realized while building my own, Obsidian plugins have full, unrestricted access to all files in the vault.

Obsidian could've instead opted to be more 'batteries-included', at the cost of more development effort, but instead leaves this to the community, which in turn increases the attack surface significantly.

Or it could have a browser extension like manifest that declares all permissions used by the plugin, where attempting to access a permission that's not granted gets blocked.

Both of these approaches would've led to more real security to end users than "we have few third party dependencies".

replies(16): >>45308149 #>>45308208 #>>45308212 #>>45308222 #>>45308224 #>>45308241 #>>45308572 #>>45308600 #>>45308749 #>>45310219 #>>45310642 #>>45310881 #>>45310991 #>>45311185 #>>45311760 #>>45311782 #
hahn-kev ◴[] No.45310881[source]
It's no worse than vscode. Sure there's permissions, but it's super common for an extension to start a process and that process can do anything it wants.
replies(3): >>45310885 #>>45310970 #>>45311166 #
1. bdzr ◴[] No.45311166[source]
It's *significantly* worse than vscode. vscode is at least attempting to grapple the problem: https://code.visualstudio.com/docs/configure/extensions/exte....