Commit Graph

9 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Rosa Gutierrez 7f5fa6d715 Use Sec-Fetch-Site exclusively for CSRF protection
And close the gap with JSON requests, which shouldn't be allowed if
Sec-Fetch-Site is 'cross-site' or 'none', only if it's empty as this
wouldn't be coming from a browser.
2025-12-12 18:37:32 +01:00
David Heinemeier Hansson efbd2cc3da Allow API JSON requests to sidestep csrf protection 2025-12-10 09:23:52 +01:00
Rosa Gutierrez f8a1e0500d Switch from report-only to actually using Sec-Fetch-Site for CSRF protection
As a fallback for Rails's token-based mechanism. To use Sec-Fetch-Site
exclusively, we'll wait until Rails offers that (when we upstream this).
2025-11-28 16:26:03 +01:00
Jorge Manrubia 3223ba53c3 We need the check in both test/code 2025-11-28 15:53:58 +01:00
Jorge Manrubia 6ccf655597 Move yabeda/prometheus stuff to the gem 2025-11-28 15:53:58 +01:00
Jorge Manrubia 3b0ddf4cfb Move sentry to engine 2025-11-28 15:53:58 +01:00
Rosa Gutierrez 3e716bfa26 Fix a couple of typos 2025-11-26 13:16:44 +01:00
Rosa Gutierrez fac9f3c369 Clean up a little bit the CSRF reporting code
Small follow-up to https://github.com/basecamp/fizzy/pull/1721
2025-11-25 21:28:50 +01:00
Rosa Gutierrez d88949288c Check and report on Sec-Fetch-Site header for forgery protection
This is a great, solid alternative to CSRF tokens for CSRF protection
when we aren't worried about older browsers or other kind of actors
doing modifying requests in our app, and could be a good test for future
upstreaming to Rails (although there we'd need to continue using CSRF
tokens or at least letting people opt out manually).

Let's start checking the header and reporting on it when CSRF fails or
when it doesn't match the other checks Rails does, and then promote this
to be the only way to defend from CSRF.
2025-11-25 19:19:50 +01:00