-
-
Save jed/964847 to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.
use cached DOM elements to escape HTML
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
function( | |
a // string to escape | |
){ | |
return new // create a new | |
Option(a) // <option> element containing the HTML, | |
.innerHTML // and return its HTML. | |
} |
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
function(a){return new Option(a).innerHTML} |
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
DO WHAT THE FUCK YOU WANT TO PUBLIC LICENSE | |
Version 2, December 2004 | |
Copyright (C) 2011 Jed Schmidt <http://jed.is> | |
Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim or modified | |
copies of this license document, and changing it is allowed as long | |
as the name is changed. | |
DO WHAT THE FUCK YOU WANT TO PUBLIC LICENSE | |
TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR COPYING, DISTRIBUTION AND MODIFICATION | |
0. You just DO WHAT THE FUCK YOU WANT TO. |
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
{ | |
"name": "escapeHTML", | |
"keywords": ["escape", "escaping", "HTML", "XSS"] | |
} |
I like to keep things challenging, so I’d vote for…
- IE6+
- Latest stable Opera, Firefox, Chrome, and Safari
IMHO only supporting the latest IE release would make things too easy, but that’s just me. What do others think?
My humble opinion: script w/o ie6 is better than no script at all, but script in 140 that supports ie6 is better than one in 140 bytes that doesn't support ie6.
Maybe, non-ie6 scripts should have "ie7+" keyword?
Here's the old version using the textNode
's data
property instead of nodeValue
(browser support IE5+, and everything else):
var escapeHTML = (function() {
var el = document.createElement('b'),
textNode = el.appendChild(document.createTextNode(''));
return function(str) {
textNode.data = str;
return el.innerHTML;
};
})();
Minified (132 bytes):
function(a,b){a=(b=a.createElement('b')).appendChild(a.createTextNode(0))
return function(s){a.data=s
return b.innerHTML}}(document)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
good question, @mathiasbynens... which ones do you think we should target?