fix(template-compiler): restrict srcdoc attribute on all iframe element

[pmdartus]

Details

This PR restrict the usage of the srcdoc on iframe elements regardless of the element namespace. This change should be revisited once #1136 is fixed.

Does this PR introduce a breaking change?

• Yes
• No

Very very low chance of breakage, because this change only affects iframe element created in the MathML namespace.

[salesforce-best-lwc-internal]

Benchmark results

Base commit: b32da03 | Target commit: 492b8c1

lwc-engine-benchmark

table-append-1k	metric	base(b32da03)	target(492b8c1)	trend
benchmark-table/append/1k	duration	151.45 (±5.35 ms)	155.25 (±4.70 ms)	+3.8ms (2.5%) 👎

table-clear-1k	metric	base(b32da03)	target(492b8c1)	trend
benchmark-table/clear/1k	duration	10.60 (±0.60 ms)	10.85 (±0.70 ms)	+0.3ms (2.4%) 👌

table-create-10k	metric	base(b32da03)	target(492b8c1)	trend
benchmark-table/create/10k	duration	897.10 (±8.20 ms)	886.40 (±4.95 ms)	-10.7ms (1.2%) 👍

table-create-1k	metric	base(b32da03)	target(492b8c1)	trend
benchmark-table/create/1k	duration	120.60 (±2.50 ms)	118.40 (±2.90 ms)	-2.2ms (1.8%) 👍

table-update-10th-1k	metric	base(b32da03)	target(492b8c1)	trend
benchmark-table/update-10th/1k	duration	75.40 (±3.10 ms)	74.60 (±1.35 ms)	-0.8ms (1.1%) 👍

tablecmp-append-1k	metric	base(b32da03)	target(492b8c1)	trend
benchmark-table-component/append/1k	duration	224.40 (±8.30 ms)	223.60 (±9.50 ms)	-0.8ms (0.4%) 👌

tablecmp-clear-1k	metric	base(b32da03)	target(492b8c1)	trend
benchmark-table-component/clear/1k	duration	5.60 (±0.80 ms)	5.95 (±1.05 ms)	+0.3ms (6.2%) 👌

tablecmp-create-10k	metric	base(b32da03)	target(492b8c1)	trend
benchmark-table-component/create/10k	duration	1775.70 (±11.75 ms)	1763.05 (±11.95 ms)	-12.6ms (0.7%) 👍

tablecmp-create-1k	metric	base(b32da03)	target(492b8c1)	trend
benchmark-table-component/create/1k	duration	209.35 (±5.30 ms)	208.80 (±7.30 ms)	-0.6ms (0.3%) 👌

tablecmp-update-10th-1k	metric	base(b32da03)	target(492b8c1)	trend
benchmark-table-component/update-10th/1k	duration	69.05 (±4.85 ms)	68.75 (±4.35 ms)	-0.3ms (0.4%) 👌

wc-append-1k	metric	base(b32da03)	target(492b8c1)	trend
benchmark-table-wc/append/1k	duration	231.90 (±16.00 ms)	235.15 (±18.90 ms)	+3.3ms (1.4%) 👌

wc-clear-1k	metric	base(b32da03)	target(492b8c1)	trend
benchmark-table-wc/clear/1k	duration	10.65 (±1.55 ms)	11.55 (±1.75 ms)	+0.9ms (8.5%) 👌

wc-create-10k	metric	base(b32da03)	target(492b8c1)	trend
benchmark-table-wc/create/10k	duration	1872.40 (±14.30 ms)	1896.15 (±15.35 ms)	+23.8ms (1.3%) 👎

wc-create-1k	metric	base(b32da03)	target(492b8c1)	trend
benchmark-table-wc/create/1k	duration	220.30 (±5.25 ms)	213.90 (±5.95 ms)	-6.4ms (2.9%) 👍

wc-update-10th-1k	metric	base(b32da03)	target(492b8c1)	trend
benchmark-table-wc/update-10th/1k	duration	70.45 (±5.55 ms)	67.80 (±4.50 ms)	-2.6ms (3.8%) 👌

[salesforce-best-lwc-internal]

Benchmark results

Base commit: b32da03 | Target commit: 492b8c1

lwc-engine-benchmark

table-append-1k	metric	base(b32da03)	target(492b8c1)	trend
benchmark-table/append/1k	duration	151.45 (±5.35 ms)	148.45 (±4.95 ms)	-3.0ms (2.0%) 👍

table-clear-1k	metric	base(b32da03)	target(492b8c1)	trend
benchmark-table/clear/1k	duration	10.60 (±0.60 ms)	11.10 (±0.50 ms)	+0.5ms (4.7%) 👌

table-create-10k	metric	base(b32da03)	target(492b8c1)	trend
benchmark-table/create/10k	duration	897.10 (±8.20 ms)	881.30 (±6.25 ms)	-15.8ms (1.8%) 👍

table-create-1k	metric	base(b32da03)	target(492b8c1)	trend
benchmark-table/create/1k	duration	120.60 (±2.50 ms)	117.90 (±3.45 ms)	-2.7ms (2.2%) 👍

table-update-10th-1k	metric	base(b32da03)	target(492b8c1)	trend
benchmark-table/update-10th/1k	duration	75.40 (±3.10 ms)	74.75 (±2.00 ms)	-0.7ms (0.9%) 👌

tablecmp-append-1k	metric	base(b32da03)	target(492b8c1)	trend
benchmark-table-component/append/1k	duration	224.40 (±8.30 ms)	230.40 (±16.05 ms)	+6.0ms (2.7%) 👌

tablecmp-clear-1k	metric	base(b32da03)	target(492b8c1)	trend
benchmark-table-component/clear/1k	duration	5.60 (±0.80 ms)	5.90 (±0.90 ms)	+0.3ms (5.4%) 👌

tablecmp-create-10k	metric	base(b32da03)	target(492b8c1)	trend
benchmark-table-component/create/10k	duration	1775.70 (±11.75 ms)	1780.65 (±10.65 ms)	+5.0ms (0.3%) 👎

tablecmp-create-1k	metric	base(b32da03)	target(492b8c1)	trend
benchmark-table-component/create/1k	duration	209.35 (±5.30 ms)	208.25 (±5.50 ms)	-1.1ms (0.5%) 👌

tablecmp-update-10th-1k	metric	base(b32da03)	target(492b8c1)	trend
benchmark-table-component/update-10th/1k	duration	69.05 (±4.85 ms)	67.60 (±3.85 ms)	-1.5ms (2.1%) 👌

wc-append-1k	metric	base(b32da03)	target(492b8c1)	trend
benchmark-table-wc/append/1k	duration	231.90 (±16.00 ms)	237.50 (±16.95 ms)	+5.6ms (2.4%) 👌

wc-clear-1k	metric	base(b32da03)	target(492b8c1)	trend
benchmark-table-wc/clear/1k	duration	10.65 (±1.55 ms)	10.50 (±1.80 ms)	-0.1ms (1.4%) 👌

wc-create-10k	metric	base(b32da03)	target(492b8c1)	trend
benchmark-table-wc/create/10k	duration	1872.40 (±14.30 ms)	1879.20 (±13.45 ms)	+6.8ms (0.4%) 👎

wc-create-1k	metric	base(b32da03)	target(492b8c1)	trend
benchmark-table-wc/create/1k	duration	220.30 (±5.25 ms)	217.50 (±4.65 ms)	-2.8ms (1.3%) 👌

wc-update-10th-1k	metric	base(b32da03)	target(492b8c1)	trend
benchmark-table-wc/update-10th/1k	duration	70.45 (±5.55 ms)	69.20 (±5.60 ms)	-1.2ms (1.8%) 👌

[caridy]

LGTM, we should definitely restrict this. Few questions about the compatibility of this one:

• this is a security fix (we should be ok breaking folks here if that's what they are using) /cc @Gr8Gatsby
• locker was not protecting this one (interesting to see if there are similar features that it is not protecting) cc @jfparadis
• how are we going to proceed with this one considering that it is a breaking change. /cc @bkusumo