fix: disable strict access when running inside Node.js

[sheremet-va]

Description

Related #3866

Please don't delete this checklist! Before submitting the PR, please make sure you do the following:

• It's really useful if your PR references an issue where it is discussed ahead of time. If the feature is substantial or introduces breaking changes without a discussion, PR might be closed.
• Ideally, include a test that fails without this PR but passes with it.
• Please, don't make changes to pnpm-lock.yaml unless you introduce a new test example.

Tests

• Run the tests with pnpm test:ci.

Documentation

• If you introduce new functionality, document it. You can run documentation with pnpm run docs command.

Changesets

• Changes in changelog are generated from PR name. Please, make sure that it explains your changes in an understandable manner. Please, prefix changeset messages with feat:, fix:, perf:, docs:, or chore:.

[stackblitz]

Run & review this pull request in StackBlitz Codeflow.

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for fastidious-cascaron-4ded94 canceled.

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	cd4ad31
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/fastidious-cascaron-4ded94/deploys/64d9f9b45a74f40008d68ff0

[sheremet-va]

@patak-dev can you help me understand if this is a good idea for Vitest? Or should we try to add related files to fs.allow?

[patak-dev]

I think it depends on whether the Vite server can be accessed from out of the Vitest project. We need this restriction mainly when the server is exposed to the network, if that isn't possible in Vitest then disabling strict sounds ok to me. Probably a good idea to double-check getting @antfu's opinion too.

[sheremet-va]

I think it depends on whether the Vite server can be accessed from out of the Vitest project. We need this restriction mainly when the server is exposed to the network, if that isn't possible in Vitest then disabling strict sounds ok to me. Probably a good idea to double-check getting @antfu's opinion too.

The thing is that when we use ssr flag, then it bypasses this check. So I'm not sure if either way is secure enough for Vitest 🤔

[sheremet-va]

This was fixed in #3956