fix: disable CSRF checks in dev - #14335
Conversation
🦋 Changeset detectedLatest commit: bca2764 The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump. This PR includes changesets to release 1 package
Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are. Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR |
dummdidumm
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
worth a callout in the docs somewhere? not sure where, and not in any way blocking
|
good point — added to the |
|
@Rich-Harris I've talked to people on Discord that seemed to be running "npm run dev" in production. It's not a valid use case but I wonder if we won't accidentally enable a sudden security hole for these people, which can come back in form of badwill? This change sounds like something for Kit 3.x imho. Wouldn't it be possible to have remote functions respect |
|
I... what? How? How does someone end up in that situation? It's literally called
That's a separate conversation to 'should the origin be checked?' and the answer is no — if something other than your own origin is calling remote functions, it's a bad request, period |
See sveltejs#14309 (comment) closes sveltejs#14309
…DE_ENV (#16313) The NODE_ENV saga continues. Any build where NODE_ENV isn't `production` currently ships with every origin check compiled out: ```js // respond.js if (!DEV) { // cross-site remote request check // cross-site form submission check (csrf.checkOrigin / trustedOrigins) } ``` `DEV` comes from esm-env, which kit bundles into apps resolved by NODE_ENV, so `NODE_ENV=staging vite build` produces a deployable server with CSRF protection silently disabled. Vite's docs list non-production builds as a supported workflow, and khromov raised this exact failure mode in #14335 when the gate was added. At the time `DEV` was assumed to only mean `vite dev`, which the esm-env consolidation in #14308 no longer guarantees (first leak #15632, fixed by #15852, second leak #16008, fixed by #16023). This applies the rule from the #15852 body ("reverting to the global constant where we want the code to only run during `vite dev` ... Every other place that uses DEV is meant to fire warnings ... and that should still happen if the user did `NODE_ENV=development vite build`") to two sites it missed: - the `respond.js` gate, `!DEV` to `!__SVELTEKIT_DEV__`, covering both the form CSRF check and the remote functions origin check that now shares it - the live-serving condition in `app/server/remote/prerender.js`, same one-token swap (prerendered remote functions were served live in these builds) The three validation `DEV` sites in `respond.js` (`validateHeaders`, `page_nodes.validate()`, `validate_server_exports`) are deliberately untouched. They are warning sites and should keep following NODE_ENV per the rule. The check internals are also untouched, so this stays out of the way of the `sec-fetch-site` idea in #15992. The new spec in `test/build-errors` builds a minimal fixture with `NODE_ENV=staging`, imports the generated server, and asserts a normal GET returns 200 while a forged cross-site form POST returns 403. It fails on main (the POST returns 200) and passes with the fix. The existing basics CSRF tests stay green in both modes, and dev behavior is unchanged. There are HMR-coupled `DEV` gates in `client.js` and the remote query modules from the same class. Left for a follow-up, `client.js` currently conflicts with #16307. --- ### Please don't delete this checklist! Before submitting the PR, please make sure you do the following: - [x] It's really useful if your PR references an issue where it is discussed ahead of time. In many cases, features are absent for a reason. For large changes, please create an RFC: https://github.com/sveltejs/rfcs - [x] This message body should clearly illustrate what problems it solves. - [x] Ideally, include a test that fails without this PR but passes with it. ### Tests - [x] Run the tests with `pnpm test` and lint the project with `pnpm lint` and `pnpm check` ### Changesets - [x] If your PR makes a change that should be noted in one or more packages' changelogs, generate a changeset by running `pnpm changeset` and following the prompts. Changesets that add features should be `minor` and those that fix bugs should be `patch`. Please prefix changeset messages with `feat:`, `fix:`, or `chore:`. ### Edits - [x] Please ensure that 'Allow edits from maintainers' is checked. PRs without this option may be closed. --------- Co-authored-by: Tee Ming <chewteeming01@gmail.com>
#14309 (comment)
closes #14309
Please don't delete this checklist! Before submitting the PR, please make sure you do the following:
Tests
pnpm testand lint the project withpnpm lintandpnpm checkChangesets
pnpm changesetand following the prompts. Changesets that add features should beminorand those that fix bugs should bepatch. Please prefix changeset messages withfeat:,fix:, orchore:.Edits