Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Security Concern #54

Closed
4r7if3x opened this issue Aug 9, 2022 · 7 comments
Closed

Security Concern #54

4r7if3x opened this issue Aug 9, 2022 · 7 comments
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@4r7if3x
Copy link

4r7if3x commented Aug 9, 2022

I'd like to know if you have adopted any procedure to prevent 3rd party Obsidian plugins to access & manipulate data on web view sessions, as it can bring serious security issues while we are signed in to our accounts. Therefore, I suppose any process in the Electron app is able to access sensitive information such as emails if they are instructed to do so.

Other than that, I expected the sessions to be isolated between each web view as well, but that's not the case.

And finally, I rather see the actual User-Agent in Google activity logs than "Chrome" which makes the ACL review easier.

@Ellpeck
Copy link
Owner

Ellpeck commented Aug 9, 2022

Hi, thanks for your inquiry!

Custom Frames does not have any custom security management, nor are there plans to add any. The ability to access the sites you're browsing is not exclusive to Custom Frames, as the same security concerns arise when simply using an iframe within Obsidian like most users that don't use Custom Frames do. Obsidian, using Electron, is really just a browser, and similarly to Obsidian plugins, browser plugins have this same ability of maliciously interacting with a user's data. None of these issues are reasonable solvable within the scope of what this plugin is meant to provide.

If you're concerned about your personal data when using this plugin, I advise not installing any additional plugins by authors you don't trust, or always checking the plugins' source code for anything that could be malicious.

Finally, the request to use a custom user-agent is being tracked in #26.

@Ellpeck Ellpeck closed this as not planned Won't fix, can't repro, duplicate, stale Aug 9, 2022
@4r7if3x
Copy link
Author

4r7if3x commented Aug 10, 2022

Hi, thanks for your quick response.

I would like to clarify that the difference between using Chrome Extensions is that Google regularly reviews the extensions provided on its Web Store and even go further to provide approval seals to some of those. Other than that, we have explicit permission control on those extensions in the web browser. Such precautions are not taken in Obsidian's plugin store nor there is any permission control provided.

Many Obsidian users including myself are using several 3rd party plugins and I believe we need to find a solution with the help of @obsidianmd (@lishid, @ericaxu, @liamcain, etc.) since not everyone is technical and the responsibility of their data safety is on us. I'm quite busy, but if I find some time to do something about this, I'd send a PR on your way ;)

For now, I'm going to use this plugin for static websites, but I don't feel comfortable connecting my Google account in order to pin my Calendar.

@Ellpeck
Copy link
Owner

Ellpeck commented Aug 10, 2022

I'll briefly reopen this issue because I think it makes a lot of sense to add a notice when first adding a custom frame that informs the user about the security implications related to their personal data on websites.

@Ellpeck Ellpeck reopened this Aug 10, 2022
@Ellpeck Ellpeck added documentation Improvements or additions to documentation enhancement New feature or request labels Aug 10, 2022
@Ellpeck
Copy link
Owner

Ellpeck commented Aug 10, 2022

Additionally, I think web data security is a broader issue that also relates to the use of iframes and other plugins that involve the inputting of personal data for use in websites, like the Kindle and Todoist plugins. In my opinion, it would make the most sense to open a discussion about this on the Obsidian forum, where a more generalized solution for plugin developers (and plugin users) can be discussed.

@lishid
Copy link

lishid commented Aug 10, 2022

@samariafar Unfortunately it is practically impossible to secure plugins without severely crippling the API - For more details read the thread on the forum here.

In the end it really depends on your threat model, how much trust the plugin authors, how comfortable you are with using programs downloaded from the internet, how much work you are willing to put in to audit plugin code, and how much you value convenience. I don't think this can be solved by Obsidian or this plugin.

@TrustTepee
Copy link

Hi, thanks for your quick response.

I would like to clarify that the difference between using Chrome Extensions is that Google regularly reviews the extensions provided on its Web Store and even go further to provide approval seals to some of those. Other than that, we have explicit permission control on those extensions in the web browser. Such precautions are not taken in Obsidian's plugin store nor there is any permission control provided.

Many Obsidian users including myself are using several 3rd party plugins and I believe we need to find a solution with the help of @obsidianmd (@lishid, @ericaxu, @liamcain, etc.) since not everyone is technical and the responsibility of their data safety is on us. I'm quite busy, but if I find some time to do something about this, I'd send a PR on your way ;)

For now, I'm going to use this plugin for static websites, but I don't feel comfortable connecting my Google account in order to pin my Calendar.

Could not agree more with the view expressed here!

@Ellpeck
Copy link
Owner

Ellpeck commented Nov 17, 2022

Hi! The creator of Obsidian, lishid, has already answered this question above, and linked to a forum thread where this issue can be discussed in greater detail. This is not an issue for Custom Frames to deal with or attempt to fix.

Since this issue is linked in the plugin's settings as a reference for any security concerns users might have, I want it to be kept as clean as possible, and as such, I'm going to lock it for now.

Repository owner locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Nov 17, 2022
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants