/ 
YATT-Lite-0.0_7
/ todo
Security Advisories (12)
CVE-2018-14041 (2018-07-13)

In Bootstrap before 4.1.2, XSS is possible in the data-target property of scrollspy.

CVE-2018-14042 (2018-07-13)

In Bootstrap before 4.1.2, XSS is possible in the data-container property of tooltip.

CVE-2020-11022 (2020-04-29)

In jQuery versions greater than or equal to 1.2 and before 3.5.0, passing HTML from untrusted sources - even after sanitizing it - to one of jQuery's DOM manipulation methods (i.e. .html(), .append(), and others) may execute untrusted code. This problem is patched in jQuery 3.5.0.

CVE-2020-11023 (2020-04-29)

In jQuery versions greater than or equal to 1.0.3 and before 3.5.0, passing HTML containing <option> elements from untrusted sources - even after sanitizing it - to one of jQuery's DOM manipulation methods (i.e. .html(), .append(), and others) may execute untrusted code. This problem is patched in jQuery 3.5.0.

CVE-2019-11358 (2019-04-20)

jQuery before 3.4.0, as used in Drupal, Backdrop CMS, and other products, mishandles jQuery.extend(true, {}, ...) because of Object.prototype pollution. If an unsanitized source object contained an enumerable __proto__ property, it could extend the native Object.prototype.

CVE-2015-9251 (2018-01-18)

jQuery before 3.0.0 is vulnerable to Cross-site Scripting (XSS) attacks when a cross-domain Ajax request is performed without the dataType option, causing text/javascript responses to be executed.

CVE-2011-4969 (2013-03-08)

Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in jQuery before 1.6.3, when using location.hash to select elements, allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via a crafted tag.

CVE-2012-6708 (2018-01-18)

jQuery before 1.9.0 is vulnerable to Cross-site Scripting (XSS) attacks. The jQuery(strInput) function does not differentiate selectors from HTML in a reliable fashion. In vulnerable versions, jQuery determined whether the input was HTML by looking for the '<' character anywhere in the string, giving attackers more flexibility when attempting to construct a malicious payload. In fixed versions, jQuery only deems the input to be HTML if it explicitly starts with the '<' character, limiting exploitability only to attackers who can control the beginning of a string, which is far less common.

CVE-2020-7656 (2020-05-19)

jquery prior to 1.9.0 allows Cross-site Scripting attacks via the load method. The load method fails to recognize and remove "<script>" HTML tags that contain a whitespace character, i.e: "</script >", which results in the enclosed script logic to be executed.

CVE-2019-5428

Prototype Pollution is a vulnerability affecting JavaScript. Prototype Pollution refers to the ability to inject properties into existing JavaScript language construct prototypes, such as objects. JavaScript allows all Object attributes to be altered, including their magical attributes such as _proto_, constructor and prototype. An attacker manipulates these attributes to overwrite, or pollute, a JavaScript application object prototype of the base object by injecting other values. Properties on the Object.prototype are then inherited by all the JavaScript objects through the prototype chain. When that happens, this leads to either denial of service by triggering JavaScript exceptions, or it tampers with the application source code to force the code path that the attacker injects, thereby leading to remote code execution.

CVE-2014-6071 (2018-01-16)

jQuery 1.4.2 allows remote attackers to conduct cross-site scripting (XSS) attacks via vectors related to use of the text method inside after.

CVE-2018-14040 (2018-07-13)

Prototype Pollution is a vulnerability affecting JavaScript. Prototype Pollution refers to the ability to inject properties into existing JavaScript language construct prototypes, such as objects. JavaScript allows all Object attributes to be altered, including their magical attributes such as _proto_, constructor and prototype. An attacker manipulates these attributes to overwrite, or pollute, a JavaScript application object prototype of the base object by injecting other values. Properties on the Object.prototype are then inherited by all the JavaScript objects through the prototype chain. When that happens, this leads to either denial of service by triggering JavaScript exceptions, or it tampers with the application source code to force the code path that the attacker injects, thereby leading to remote code execution.

NAME

todo -- 課題の一覧

Issues

yatt xgettext 初回データの問題

最初の一度目に生成される .htyattmsg.en.po が, 複数行形式になっていない。

TODOs

English translation and internal documentation.

英訳しなきゃ... .pm 側の pod も書かなきゃ

.htyattconfig.xhf でなく yaml も読めるように

xhf を使ったのは依存を減らすためだけだったのだから。 使いたい人が使えるようにするのはあり。

...yaml2xhf とか添付すべきよね...

rename scripts/yatt.* to scripts/yatt-*

yatt.* だと windows で困るから。 yatt-*.pl とかに rename しようかと。 でもその前にラッパースクリプト scripts/yatt を完成させなきゃ。

nginx.conf とか systemd.service とか

設定ファイルの生成支援もの、手元の環境依存のままサンプルとして出すのか、 ちゃんと汎用化してから出すか...

*.ytmpl の再読み込みを簡単にさせられないか

アプリのリスタートをせずに済むようにしたい

.htyatt* の再読み込みを簡単に...

同じく。 Factory API の改良が必要になるはず。

DirApp->cmd_SUB に $CON を渡すべき

DirApp 毎の CLI 用ユーザ拡張コマンド sub cmd_COMMAND の引数仕様を変更したい。 現在は $dirapp->cmd_COMMAND(@ARGV) だが、これだと例えば dbh も $dirapp の中にキャッシュすることになり、不便。 やはり $dirapp->cmd_COMMAND($CON, @ARGV) にして、 作業用オブジェクトを外から渡せるようにしたい。

もしくは、 with_connection() のような API を整理して、 *CON 経由で渡すか。その方が、現在の実装との差は少ないが...

AppPath API の全面改定

全てが気に入らない。

Arguments

SiteApp, DirApp という名前は適切か?

PSGI との用語の違いを名前で際立たせよう、という意図で付けた名前だった。 (App という用語が二つの粒度で使われる、と。サイト全体 vs その中の各ディレクトリ)

SiteApp を WebMVC0.pm にする手もあった。しかしそれだと、 git submodule 化が出来ない。

元々の役割は Dispatcher なので、そう呼んでも良かったかもしれない。

DirApp も、単に App と呼びたかった。でもそれでは PSGI App と誤解されうる。

Wish list

CGen::JS

試作品はあるけど、使い方が気に入らない。

starman 向けに、起動時一括コンパイルモードも欲しい

fork 後にコンパイルするのは無駄だし。 あと、運用形態次第では、アプリ起動時にテンプレートエラーが分かると嬉しいケースもあるはず。

あと、コンパイルが済んだテンプレート関連データは捨てられるようにすべき。 (今はメモリーに残してる)