[webkit-dev] Best way to disable JavaScript

Jochen Eisinger jochen at chromium.org
Mon Mar 18 00:30:39 PDT 2013

On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 8:26 PM, Geoffrey Garen <ggaren at apple.com> wrote:

> Hi folks.
> Currently, we have two different ways to disable JavaScript execution:
> (1) Paste / Drag n Drop / editing: Remove script elements and script
> attributes from untrusted source markup at parse time.
> (2) JavaScript disabled setting / Content Security Policy: Check settings
> and/or CSP at runtime.
> There are problems with mode (2):
> * It breaks features that are implemented in JavaScript.
> The Web Inspector, bookmarklets, extensions, Safari Reader, and Safari
> autofill all run JavaScript. This means that they break when users disable
> JavaScript.

I'm not sure I understand:

We only invoke canExecuteScript for scripts in the main world, so running
extensions (or anything else that's running in an isolated world) should
not be affected.

Also, the actual permission check is done via
FrameLoaderClient::allowScript and ::allowScriptFromSource, so blocking
e.g. only scripts from the web, but not from the inspector should also be


> As a defense against phishing attacks, mail clients and other web content
> readers disable JavaScript. This means that they can't implement pieces of
> their UI in JavaScript.
> (FWIW, WebKit violates the CSP specification in this regard: "Enforcing a
> CSP policy should not interfere with the operation of user-supplied scripts
> such as third-party user-agent add-ons and JavaScript bookmarklets.")
> * It subjects users to XSS attacks.
> Runtime checking mode leaves inert JavaScript in the untrusted document.
> This is a risky proposition. Operations that clone or adopt nodes from the
> untrusted document unwittingly re-vivify that inert JavaScript, subjecting
> the user to attack. Experience shows that this is a difficult programming
> model to get right.
> * It's hard to verify.
> We have 18 different call sites to canExecuteScripts() in WebKit, not
> counting the call sites that pertain to plug-ins. Are you confident we've
> caught all the right places? Do you know if the feature you just added
> needs to call canExecuteScripts()?
> * It's two different ways to do the same thing.
> Simplicity is a goal of the WebKit project.
> Proposal:
> If -- for any reason -- JavaScript is disabled in a given document, the
> document parser will elide all JavaScript. This means that runtime checks
> can be removed.
> One potential downside to this proposal is that it changes the document's
> internal structure. Since the changes are not generally observable, since
> they only take place when we're already making much bigger changes by
> preventing whole scripts from running, and since we haven't seen any
> compatibility problems from our paste / drag n drop / editing behavior in
> this regard, I think this downside is acceptable.
> Another potential downside is that CSP errors will be reported at parse
> time instead of runtime. FWIW, some authors might see this as an upside.
> Any objections?
> Thanks,
> Geoff
> _______________________________________________
> webkit-dev mailing list
> webkit-dev at lists.webkit.org
> https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.webkit.org/pipermail/webkit-dev/attachments/20130318/359dde80/attachment.html>

More information about the webkit-dev mailing list