Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Do we need sandbox related APIs? #10

Open
XadillaX opened this issue May 16, 2022 · 5 comments
Open

Do we need sandbox related APIs? #10

XadillaX opened this issue May 16, 2022 · 5 comments

Comments

@XadillaX
Copy link

I think sandbox related APIs are needed in some SSR situation. Just something like Node.js' vm.

@jasnell
Copy link
Contributor

jasnell commented May 16, 2022

This would need to be defined a whole lot more before we can progress. Node.js' vm module is absolutely not a sandbox.

@XadillaX
Copy link
Author

For most situation, something like vm is enough. It's a bit safer than eval.

Since Winter is a non-browser runtime spec, I think this ability is necessary.

@legendecas
Copy link
Member

This can fall into the coverage of ShadowRealm and its Web integration.

@maxshirshin
Copy link

Node's vm is useful in building sandbox-like environments, as Node exposes many sensitive and powerful APIs by default. This is not necessarily the case for the common minimum APIs we're discussing here. So far, looks like we may put things like file or system env access out of the scope, so the first question is: what would be the purpose of such a sandbox?

@jasnell
Copy link
Contributor

jasnell commented May 18, 2022

Currently, there's not enough common api surface here shared across multiple runtimes to justify adding anything to the common API surface. This could make sense as a separate workstream but doesn't make sense for the minimum common api doc at this time.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants