ABE Sandbox action and same-site (i)frames

Ask for help about NoScript, no registration needed to post
Guest

ABE Sandbox action and same-site (i)frames

Post by Guest »

Currently the ABE Sandbox action breaks many web pages because it indiscriminately blocks all frames and iframes, even those loading content from the same site as their parent.
Is there a security reason for this behaviour? Otherwise, a configuration option to allow same-site (i)frames would make ABE Sandbox rules much more useful.
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/17.0
User avatar
therube
Ambassador
Posts: 7991
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 4:17 pm
Location: Maryland USA

Re: ABE Sandbox action and same-site (i)frames

Post by therube »

Particular sites where this happens?
Particular rules that you are using?
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.19) Gecko/20110420 SeaMonkey/2.0.14 Pinball NoScript FlashGot AdblockPlus
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:26.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/26.0 SeaMonkey/2.23
Guest

Re: ABE Sandbox action and same-site (i)frames

Post by Guest »

therube wrote:Particular sites where this happens?
http://krautchan.net/
therube wrote:Particular rules that you are using?
Site krautchan.net
Sandbox

krautchan.net ist just an example - any ABE sandboxed frameset page will appear empty, frame content source doesn't matter.
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/17.0
User avatar
Thrawn
Master Bug Buster
Posts: 3106
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2012 3:46 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: ABE Sandbox action and same-site (i)frames

Post by Thrawn »

I'm thinking that Sandbox was probably intended originally as an XSS defence. In which case, the site is potentially compromised and scripts coming from it shouldn't be automatically trusted.
======
Thrawn
------------
Religion is not the opium of the masses. Daily life is the opium of the masses.

True religion, which dares to acknowledge death and challenge the way we live, is an attempt to wake up.
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Ubuntu; Linux x86_64; rv:25.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/25.0
Guest

Re: ABE Sandbox action and same-site (i)frames

Post by Guest »

Thrawn wrote:I'm thinking that Sandbox was probably intended originally as an XSS defence. In which case, the site is potentially compromised and scripts coming from it shouldn't be automatically trusted.
Sandbox filtering scripts and other active contents - including third-party (i)frames - is reasonable, but blocking content from the same site just because it would load in an (i)frame doesn't make sense to me.
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/17.0
User avatar
Thrawn
Master Bug Buster
Posts: 3106
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2012 3:46 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: ABE Sandbox action and same-site (i)frames

Post by Thrawn »

Do you understand the idea of cross-site scripting?
======
Thrawn
------------
Religion is not the opium of the masses. Daily life is the opium of the masses.

True religion, which dares to acknowledge death and challenge the way we live, is an attempt to wake up.
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Ubuntu; Linux x86_64; rv:25.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/25.0
Guest

Re: ABE Sandbox action and same-site (i)frames

Post by Guest »

Thrawn wrote:Do you understand the idea of cross-site scripting?
So the best solution would be an about:config preference similar to noscript.forbidIFramesContext but for the ABE Sandbox.
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/17.0
Post Reply