@ Plain Text Nostr

<-- back to main feed

<-- back to original thread

thread · root 6b4bdc7b…6045 · depth 2 · · selected 2736a3b3…13a7

thread

root 6b4bdc7b…6045 · depth 2 · · selected 2736a3b3…13a7

df739a4c91de -- 4mo [root] 
|    #AskNostr #Nostr 👀 WebWorkers and iFrame isolation with window.nostr.signEvent(), as if it were using any NIP-07
|    extension, represent a great move in the right direction. I recommend that Nostr developers pay attention to
|    OPFS capabilities versus IndexedDB where possible. OPFS avoids metadata leakage and is now part of the Baseline
|    in all browsers. 🔏
|    
|    https://primal.net/e/nevent1qqs8tqf99ddes0jh4lngxaaxjm3r39kc3xvqeh2xjxg7pjmwd87q68qnrcn50
|    nostr:naddr1qqsxummnw3e8qctnwvkkgetrv4h8gunpd35h5ety945kgetww35hg7gpzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgq3qk7cn
|    st4fh4ajgg8w6ndcmqen4fnyc7ahhm3zpp255vdxqarrtekqxpqqqp65wuvt8qe
|    reply [1 reply]
b7b1382ea9bd -- 4mo
What stops a rogue extension from accessing the OPFS using navigator.storage.getDirectory() by injecting a
<script>? Wouldn't any ext have access in that manor?
reply [1 reply]
df739a4c91de -- 4mo [parent] 
     That is a good question, It is bound to the origin binding: OPFS storage is origin-private. Even if an extension
     injects code, the storage it accesses is scoped to that origin. It cannot cross into another site’s OPFS. So if
     you’re on NostrVault.tld, injected code can only touch NostrVault.tld OPFS, not NostrClient.com’s or a rogue
     extension.
     
     The rogue extension would have to have host permission to access the Origin Private File System (OPFS) and
     eventually our goal goal is to encrypt the data at rest with OPFS with an OpenPGP cert from the NFC card so a
     rogue extension wouldn’t know how to interpret it or what to do with it, if it got access to it.
     reply [1 reply]

Write a post

Sign in with a signing-capable method to publish.