There are two main differences in terms of security between a JavaScript UWP app and the Edge browser:
A JavaScript UWP app has one process (technically not true with background tasks and other edge cases but ignoring that for the moment) that runs in the corresponding appcontainer defined by the app's appx manifest. This one process is where edgehtml is loaded and is rendering HTML, talking to the network, and executing script. Specifically, the UWP main UI thread is the one where your script is running and calling into WinRT.
In the Edge browser there is a browser process running in the same appcontainer defined by its appx manifest, but there are also tab processes. These tab processes are running in restricted app containers that have fewer appx capabilities. The browser process has XAML loaded and coordinates between tabs and handles some (non-WinRT) brokering from the tab processes. The tab processes load edgehtml and that is where they render HTML, talk to the network and execute script.
There is no way to configure the JavaScript UWP app's process model but using WebViews you can approximate it. You can create out of process WebViews and to some extent configure their capabilities, although not to the same extent as the browser. The WebView processes in this case are similar to the browser's tab processes. See the MSWebViewProcess object for configuring out of process WebView creation. I also implemented out of proc WebView tabs in my JSBrowser fork.
The ApplicationContentUriRules (ACUR) section of the appx manifest lets an application define what URIs are considered app code. See a previous post for the list of ACUR effects.
Notably app code is able to access WinRT APIs. Because of this, DOM security restrictions are loosended to match what is possible with WinRT.
Privileged DOM APIs like geolocation, camera, mic etc require a user prompt in the browser before use. App code does not show the same browser prompt. There still may be an OS prompt – the same prompt that applies to any UWP app, but that’s usually per app not per origin.
App code also gets to use XMLHttpRequest or fetch to access cross origin content. Because UWP apps have separate state, cross origin here might not mean much to an attacker unless your app also has the user login to Facebook or some other interesting cross origin target.
Previously I described Application Content URI Rules (ACUR) parsing and ACUR ordering. This post describes what you get from putting a URI in ACUR.
URIs in the ACUR gain the following which is otherwise unavailable:
URIs in the ACUR that also have full WinRT access additionally gain the following:
In IE10 and other new browsers one may create MessageChannel objects that have two MessagePorts each connected (w3c spec calls it entangled) to one another such that postMessage on one port results in the message event firing on the other. You can pass an array of ports as the last parameter to postMessage and they show up in the ports property of the message event arg.
The postMessage here is like the worker postMessage and unlike the window and iframe postMessage in that it applies no origin checking:
Unfortunately the origin isn't an optional parameter at the end to make the two postMessages have the same signature.
On the event handler side, the event arg always has an origin property. But in the no origin case it is always the empty string.
There is also a source property on the message event arg which if set is an object that has a postMessage property allowing you to post back to your caller. It is set for the origin case, however, in the no origin case this property is null. This is somewhat reasonable because in the case of MessagePort and Workers there are only two endpoints so you always know the source of a message implicitly. Unlike the origin case in which any iframe or window can be calling postMessage on any other iframe or window and the caller is unknown. So not unreasonable but it would be nice if the source property was always set for consistency.
When a MessageChannel is created it has two MessagePorts, but until those ports are started they will queue up any messages they receive. Once started they will dispatch all queued messages. Ports don't have to be started to send messages.
A port may be started in two ways, either by explicitly calling the start method on the port, or by setting the onmessage callback property on the port. However, adding an event listener via addEventListener("message", does not start the port. It works this way in IE and Chrome and the spec states this as well.
The justification is that since you can have only one callback via onmessage that once set you must implicitly be ready to receive messages and its fine to start the port. As opposed to the addEventListener in which case the user agent cannot start implicitly because it doesn't know how many event listeners will be added. I found Hixie stating this justification in geoloc meeting notes.
I used FiddlerCore in GeolocMock to edit HTTPS responses and ran into two stumbling blocks that I'll document here. The first is that I didn't check if the Fiddler root cert existed or was installed, which of course is necessary to edit HTTPS traffic. The following is my code where I check for the certs.
if (!Fiddler.CertMaker.rootCertExists())
{
if (!Fiddler.CertMaker.createRootCert())
{
throw new Exception("Unable to create cert for FiddlerCore.");
}
}
if (!Fiddler.CertMaker.rootCertIsTrusted())
{
if (!Fiddler.CertMaker.trustRootCert())
{
throw new Exception("Unable to install FiddlerCore's cert.");
}
}The second problem I had (which would have been solved had I read all the sample code first) was that my changes weren't being applied. In my app I only need the BeforeResponse but in order to modify the response I must also sign up for the BeforeRequest event and mark the bBufferResponse flag on the session before the response comes back. For example:
Fiddler.FiddlerApplication.BeforeRequest += new SessionStateHandler(FiddlerApplication_BeforeRequest);
Fiddler.FiddlerApplication.BeforeResponse += new SessionStateHandler(FiddlerApplication_BeforeResponse);
...
private void FiddlerApplication_BeforeRequest(Session oSession)
{
if (IsInterestingSession(oSession))
{
oSession.bBufferResponse = true;
}
}
For my GeolocMock weekend project I intended to use the Bing Maps API to display a map in a WebBrowser control and allow the user to interact with that to select a location to be consumed by my application. Getting my .NET code to talk to the JavaScript in the WebBrowser control was surprisingly easy.
To have .NET execute JavaScript code you can use the InvokeScript method passing the name of the JavaScript function to execute and an object array of parameters to pass:
this.webBrowser2.Document.InvokeScript("onLocationStateChanged",
new object[] {
latitudeTextBoxText,
longitudeTextBoxText,
altitudeTextBoxText,
uncertaintyTextBoxText
});The other direction, having JavaScript call into .NET is slightly more complicated but still pretty easy as far as language interop goes. The first step is to mark your assembly as ComVisible so that it can interact with JavaScript via COM. VS had already added a ComVisible declaration to my project I just had to change the value to true.
[assembly: ComVisible(true)]Next set ObjectForScripting attribute to the object you want to expose to JavaScript.
this.webBrowser2.ObjectForScripting = this.locationState;Now that object is exposed as window.external in JavaScript and you can call methods on it.
window.external.Set(lat, long, alt, gUncert);However you don't seem to be able to test for the existence of methods off of it. For example the following JavaScript generates an exception for me even though I have a Set method:
if (window.external && window.external.Set) {
Working on GeolocMock it took me a bit to realize why my HTML could use the W3C Geolocation API in IE9 but not in my WebBrowser control in my .NET application. Eventually I realized that I was getting the wrong IE doc mode. Reading this old More IE8 Extensibility Improvements IE blog post from the IE blog I found the issue is that for app compat the WebOC picks older doc modes but an app hosting the WebOC can set a regkey to get different doc modes. The IE9 mode isn't listed in that article but I took a guess based on the values there and the decimal value 9999 gets my app IE9 mode. The following is the code I run in my application to set its regkey so that my app can get the IE9 doc mode and use the geolocation API.
static private void UseIE9DocMode()
{
RegistryKey key = null;
try
{
key = Registry.CurrentUser.OpenSubKey("Software\\Microsoft\\Internet Explorer\\Main\\FeatureControl\\FEATURE_BROWSER_EMULATION", true);
}
catch (Exception)
{
key = Registry.CurrentUser.CreateSubKey("Software\\Microsoft\\Internet Explorer\\Main\\FeatureControl\\FEATURE_BROWSER_EMULATION");
}
key.SetValue(System.Diagnostics.Process.GetCurrentProcess().MainModule.ModuleName, 9999, RegistryValueKind.DWord);
key.Close();
}
I've made GeolocMock. If your PC has no geolocation devices, IE9 uses a webservice to determine your location. GeolocMock uses FiddlerCore to intercept the response from the webservice and allows the user to replace the location in the response with another. This was a fun weekend project in order to play with FiddlerCore, the W3C Geoloc APIs in IE9, hosting the IE9 WebOC in a .NET app, and the Bing Maps APIs.
Some rights reserved