Benchmark: xss vs. dompurify vs. sanitize-html

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/dompurify@3.1.6/dist/purify.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/xss@1.0.15/dist/xss.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var data = "<p>The expected release date is <strong>8/28/2024</strong>. Shipping for all orders will begin once the pre-order item is available in-store, should there be no unexpected delays.</p>\n<p><strong><span class=\"apple-converted-space&gt; &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;\n&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;span class=\" apple-converted-space=\"\"> IMPORTANT NOTE : Orders containing one or more pre-orders are typically held until all items are released and available to ship together. </span></strong></p>\n<p><strong>Each Album Includes</strong></p>\n<ul>\n<li><b>Album Case</b></li>\n<li>\n<b>Mini Card (QR Type) : Random 1 out of 5</b><b></b>\n</li>\n<li><b>Selfie Photocard : Random 2 out of 10</b></li>\n<li><b>Image Card Set : 8 ea</b></li>\n<li><b>Sticker</b></li>\n<li><b>Invitation Card</b></li>\n</ul>\n<ul></ul>\n<ul></ul>\n<p>For in-store pickups, please refer to the in-store pickup policy tab for further information. Prices may vary in-store.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/2420/2037/files/AEONIT_1st_Single_Album_-_LUMOS_Platform_Ver._Strip.webp?v=1724256230\"></p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><strong>⚠️All of the information above is subject to change⚠️</strong></span></p>"

Tests:

xss
filterXSS(data);
dompurify
DOMPurify.sanitize(data, { ALLOWED_ATTR: [] })

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
xss
dompurify

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one month ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what is being tested, compared, and the pros/cons of each approach.

**Benchmark Overview**

The provided benchmark compares three different libraries for sanitizing HTML input: `xss` (Cross-Site Scripting), `DOMPurify`, and `sanitize-html`. The goal is to determine which library is more efficient in filtering out XSS attacks.

**Options Compared**

1. **xss**: This library filters out common XSS attack patterns, but it may not catch all possible attacks.
2. **DOMPurify**: This library uses a whitelist approach, allowing only specific attributes and tags to be included in the sanitized HTML. It's more restrictive than `xss`, but it provides better protection against XSS attacks.
3. **sanitize-html**: This library uses a blacklist approach, blocking specific malicious patterns from being injected into the HTML.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **xss**:
	* Pros: Lightweight, easy to use, and fast execution times.
	* Cons: May not catch all possible XSS attacks, as it only filters out common patterns.
2. **DOMPurify**:
	* Pros: More comprehensive protection against XSS attacks by only allowing specific attributes and tags.
	* Cons: Can be slower due to the whitelist approach, which requires more processing power.
3. **sanitize-html**:
	* Pros: Provides strong protection against XSS attacks by blocking malicious patterns using a blacklist.
	* Cons: May be slower than `xss` or `DOMPurify`, and it may require more configuration options.

**Library Explanation**

1. **xss**: The `xss` library is a simple, lightweight solution for filtering out common XSS attack patterns. It's easy to use and provides fast execution times.
2. **DOMPurify**: DOMPurify is a popular JavaScript library that uses a whitelist approach to sanitize HTML input. It allows only specific attributes and tags to be included in the sanitized HTML, making it more restrictive than `xss`.
3. **sanitize-html**: Sanitize-html is another lightweight JavaScript library for sanitizing HTML input. It uses a blacklist approach to block malicious patterns from being injected into the HTML.

**Test Case Explanation**

The test case uses the `filterXSS` and `DOMPurify.sanitize` functions, which are part of the `xss` and `DOMPurify` libraries, respectively. The `benchmark preparation code` includes a sample HTML string that contains potential XSS attack patterns, such as `<strong>...</strong>` tags with malicious content.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative solutions for sanitizing HTML input, here are a few options:

1. **DOMSanitizer**: A web API for sanitizing DOM nodes and preventing XSS attacks.
2. **HTML-Purifier**: A PHP library for purifying HTML input to prevent XSS attacks.
3. **js-xss-escaper**: A lightweight JavaScript library for escaping user-input data to prevent XSS attacks.

These alternatives offer different approaches to sanitizing HTML input, so it's essential to evaluate their pros and cons based on your specific use case.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 28 days ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:131.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/131.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 131 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
xss	20298.2 Ops/sec
dompurify	4903.3 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

xss vs. dompurify vs. sanitize-html (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: xss vs dompurify

Created: 3 months ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

xss

dompurify

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one month ago):