JWT in localStorage vs httpOnly cookie — which is safer?

Question

For my SPA's authentication, tutorials disagree: some store the JWT in `localStorage`, others in a cookie. What's the actual security difference?

Accepted Answer

- **`localStorage`**: any JavaScript on your page can read it, so a single **XSS** bug (or a compromised npm dependency) lets an attacker **steal the token** and use it from anywhere until it expires.
- **`httpOnly` cookie**: JavaScript **can't read** it. XSS can still make requests *from the victim's browser*, but it can't exfiltrate a long-lived credential. You must handle **CSRF**, which is largely addressed by `SameSite=Lax` (or `Strict`) plus checking `Origin` on state-changing requests.

Recommended for a browser app served from your own domain:
```
Set-Cookie: session=...; HttpOnly; Secure; SameSite=Lax; Path=/; Max-Age=...
```

Notes:
- For a first-party web app, a plain **server-side session** cookie is often simpler than JWT and easier to revoke.
- JWTs are handy for service-to-service calls and mobile clients (stored in secure storage).
- Whatever you choose: short expiry, server-side revocation for "log out everywhere", and a strict **Content Security Policy** to reduce XSS risk in the first place.

2 Repons