Remove HTML 5 session storage as secure session token storage #844
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Please read argumentation in #696 (comment) first. |
|
Token’s in cookies is suggested by several OAuth RFC’s. Same with several European standards. I support this. It’s really a bad isea to store high power tokens in JavaScript so I support this PR and will plan to approve in < 48 hrs after I field a few more comments.
I politely disagree with the cited comments logic. It makes no sense for browser based apps to store high power tokens in a location that is easily stolen from via XSS, which is radically more difficult to defend against vs. CSRF.
…
|
|
I am resigned to agree that we really need in memory JavaScript storage
token for SPA applications with multi-domain needs. I appreciate you
hanging in there, I see the use case and it is legit.
However, I still suggest we get rid of session storage and instead
advise the use of JavaScript closures or web worker token storage so
they cannot be stolen via XSS.
Reference: https://auth0.com/docs/tokens/token-storage
What do you think, original poster at. el.? Would you care to change
your PR if the gang here likes the Auth0 suggestion? It seems like a
very reasonable middle ground.
- Jim
On 9/23/20 6:57 PM, Elar Lang wrote:
Please read argumentation in #696 (comment)
<#696 (comment)> first.
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#844 (comment)>, or
unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAEBYCOS2PNDVE76RTLMJNLSHLGSNANCNFSM4RXOIZLA>.
--
Jim Manico
Manicode Security
https://www.manicode.com
|
|
I agree with the argumentation and udpated the PR. In memory storage, from what I have seen, is an acceptable solution that does not stand out in penetration tests of our applications. Also in next version, it could be clearer for users to move this part of the requirement to 3.5 Token-based Session Management. |
Closed
jmanico
approved these changes
Sep 29, 2020
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
This Pull Request resolves #843