fix(core): fix possible XSS attack in development through SSR. #40152
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Escape the content of the strings so that it can be safely inserted into a comment node.
The issue is that HTML does not specify any way to escape comment end text inside the comment.
<!-- The way you close a comment is with "-->". -->
. Above the"-->"
is meant to be text not an end to the comment. This can be created programmatically through DOM APIs.One would expect that the above code would be safe to do, but it turns out that because comment text is not escaped, the comment may contain text which will prematurely close the comment opening up the application for XSS attack. (In SSR we programmatically create comment nodes which may contain such text and expect them to be safe.)
This function escapes the comment text by looking for the closing char sequence
-->
and replace it with-_-_>
where the_
is a zero width space\u200B
. The result is that if a comment contains-->
text it will render normally but it will not cause the HTML parser to close the comment.PR Checklist
Please check if your PR fulfills the following requirements:
PR Type
What kind of change does this PR introduce?
What is the current behavior?
Issue Number: N/A
What is the new behavior?
Does this PR introduce a breaking change?
Other information