diff --git a/docs/2022-10-decision-on-cdata-nodes.md b/docs/2022-10-decision-on-cdata-nodes.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..bd85795
--- /dev/null
+++ b/docs/2022-10-decision-on-cdata-nodes.md
@@ -0,0 +1,1223 @@
+# Decision Summary
+
+When encountering CDATA nodes in an HTML4 document that might be treated as PCDATA by HTML5 parsers, we decided to escape the `<`, `>`, and `&` characters in that CDATA node to prevent XSS attacks, accepting that those characters will escaped even in the valid HTML4 CDATA context of a `style` tag, because that situation seems to be a rare use case that impacts only browser style, and because once Loofah defaults to HTML5 parsing (potentially in the very near future) this drawback goes away.
+
+<!-- regenerate TOC with `markdown-toc --maxdepth=2 -i` -->
+
+<!-- toc -->
+
+- [Recommendations](#recommendations)
+  * [Short term](#short-term)
+  * [Long term](#long-term)
+- [What's Happening in these CVEs](#whats-happening-in-these-cves)
+  * [The underlying behavior](#the-underlying-behavior)
+  * [Side note: CDATA vs PCDATA](#side-note-cdata-vs-pcdata)
+  * [2015-08-08: rails-html-sanitizer CVE-2015-7580](#2015-08-08-rails-html-sanitizer-cve-2015-7580)
+  * [2017-10-10: loofah vulnerability](#2017-10-10-loofah-vulnerability)
+  * [2022-04-05: `select` and `style` parents, `script` payload:](#2022-04-05-select-and-style-parents-script-payload)
+  * [Today: the foreign context vulnerability](#today-the-foreign-context-vulnerability)
+- [Solutions](#solutions)
+  * [Potential solution 1](#potential-solution-1)
+  * [Potential solution 2](#potential-solution-2)
+
+<!-- tocstop -->
+
+# Recommendations
+
+## Short term
+
+I recommend adopting [Solution 2](#potential-solution-2) below:
+
+- revert the patch in rails-html-sanitizer v1.4.3
+- apply `CGI.escapeHTML` on all CDATA nodes created by Nokogiri's HTML4 parser.
+
+This addresses all known rails-html-sanitizer vulnerabilities related to HTML4/HTML5 parser behavior mismatches, does not introduce any additional backwards-incompatible changes in behavior, is simple enough to easily reason about, and does not suffer from the performance or stack depth problems present in [Solution 1](#potential-solution-1).
+
+
+(Note that both solutions considered in this doc share one small backwards-incompatibility, which is "special characters in valid `style` tags will be entity-escaped". Unfortunately this is hard to prevent without making this patch significantly more complex, and once Loofah defaults to an HTML5 parser this behavior goes away. I am recommending we move forward with this solution despite this inconvenience.)
+
+Action items: 
+
+- implement this logic in Loofah and release v2.19.1
+- call into Loofah from rails-html-sanitizer, bump the dependency, and cut a v1.4.x release
+
+
+## Long term
+
+### Use HTML5 sanitization
+
+It's important to note that if we use an HTML5 parser for the sanitization pass, this entire class of problem goes away.
+
+We should move RHS to an HTML5 parser as soon as possible.
+
+- [Loofah using HTML5 by default](https://github.com/flavorjones/loofah/pull/239) is blocked on a Nokogiri v1.14.0 release
+- [RHS behavior changes are documented here](https://github.com/rails/rails-html-sanitizer/pull/133) in the updated tests
+
+
+### Avoid functional drift between Loofah and RHS
+
+It's important to note that Loofah and RHS initially solved the same problem in two different ways. I consider this to be a huge missed opportunity.
+
+We should adopt a policy of building features or hooks into Loofah to enable RHS to be as small as possible with only Rails-specific modifications to scrubbers.
+
+- https://github.com/rails/rails-html-sanitizer/pull/136 examines the behavior differences between the two implementations
+- `data-` attributes are the big diff, https://hackerone.com/reports/42728 was the motivating issue for that change
+
+
+# What's Happening in these CVEs
+
+There are a few related CVE and bugs that are all related to the same underlying behavior:
+
+- [#81212 Potential XSS on sanitize/Rails::Html::WhiteListSanitizer](https://hackerone.com/reports/81212)
+- [Nested Scripts · Issue #127 · flavorjones/loofah](https://github.com/flavorjones/loofah/issues/127)
+- [#1530898 Rails::Html::SafeListSanitizer vulnerable to xss attack in an environment that allows the style tag](https://hackerone.com/bugs?report_id=1530898&subject=rails)
+- [#1654310 Incomplete fix for CVE-2022-32209 (XSS in Rails::Html::Sanitizer under certain configurations)](https://hackerone.com/reports/1654310)
+- [#1656627 Rails::Html::SafeListSanitizer vulnerable to XSS when certain tags are allowed (math+style || svg+style)](https://hackerone.com/reports/1656627)
+
+Most of these are analyzed in detail below.
+
+You may wish to refer to the [WHATWG HTML5 Standard](https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/parsing.html) as an aid to follow the detailed explanations below.
+
+## The underlying behavior
+
+First, let's build a mental model, using only Nokogiri's HTML4 and HTML5 parsers, for the underlying mechanism that's causing problems.
+
+Let's start with this input string:
+
+``` html
+<select>
+  <style>
+    <script>alert(1);</script>
+  </style>
+</select>
+```
+
+Nokogiri uses the libxml2 HTML4 parser to generate this HTML4 DOM:
+
+``` text
+#(Element:0x564 {
+  name = "body",
+  children = [
+    #(Element:0x578 {
+      name = "select",
+      children = [
+        #(Element:0x58c {
+          name = "style",
+          children = [ #(CDATA "<script>alert(1);</script>")]
+          })]
+      }),
+    #(Text "\n")]
+```
+
+**⚠ Note that in the above DOM structure, the `style` tag's child is CDATA.**
+
+This HTML4 DOM serializes as:
+
+``` html
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd">
+<html><body>
+<select><style><script>alert(1);</script></style></select>
+</body></html>
+```
+
+**⚠ Note that the CDATA payload of `style` is presented literally, without any entity escaping.**
+
+Feeding the serialized HTML4 document into an HTML5 parser builds the following HTML5 DOM:
+
+``` text
+#(Element:0x5f0 {
+  name = "body",
+  children = [
+    #(Text "\n"),
+    #(Element:0x604 {
+      name = "select",
+      children = [
+        #(Element:0x618 {
+          name = "script",
+          children = [ #(Text "alert(1);")]
+          })]
+      }),
+    #(Text "\n" + "\n")]
+  })]
+```
+
+**⚠ Note that the `style` tag has been removed because the HTML5 parser considers it to be an invalid child of `select`!** The internal HTML5 parser states are described in detail later in this document.
+
+This DOM is equivalent to:
+
+``` html
+<!DOCTYPE html><html><head></head><body>
+<select><script>alert(1);</script></select>
+
+</body></html>
+```
+
+**⚠ Browsers will execute this javascript!**
+
+TL;DR: The underlying issue is the combination of two behaviors:
+
+1. libxml2's HTML4 parser serializes CDATA nodes without entity-escaping;
+2. the user agent's HTML5 parser can be made to parse that HTML4 CDATA payload as HTML5 PCDATA.
+
+libxml2's HTML4 parser creates CDATA nodes **only** for `script` and `style` tag contents. As a result, this class of sanitization vulnerability appears in situations where input contains nested `script` tags or where `style` tags are permitted but might be invalid in HTML5.
+
+
+## Side note: CDATA vs PCDATA
+
+CDATA is a string of bytes that HTML4 parsers will parse as **text and only text**; any embedded characters like `<` or `>` that might be invalid in HTML4 text nodes are valid here! Think of it as a **string literal**.
+
+CDATA is not a thing in HTML5, which instead specifies a series of tokenizer and parser states and transitions -- for example, [tokenizing a `script` tag](https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/parsing.html#script-data-state) or [tokenizing a `style` tag](https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/parsing.html#rawtext-state).
+
+PCDATA is a string of bytes that HTML4 parsers will interpret as a DOM. This data is _structural_, so characters like `<` and `>` are likely to be interpreted as parts of HTML tags. 
+
+There is no such thing as PCDATA in the HTML5 spec (reiterating, HTML5 is specified using tokenizer and parser states and transitions), but it's useful shorthand to mean _bytes that will determine the structure of the document_ and so I hope you'll forgive my slight misuse of the term in this document.
+
+
+## 2015-08-08: rails-html-sanitizer CVE-2015-7580
+
+(Reported on 2015-08-08 in https://hackerone.com/reports/81212 (and separately in https://hackerone.com/reports/89914) and announced in https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2015-7580 and https://github.com/advisories/GHSA-ghqm-pgxj-37gq.)
+
+This vulnerability describes nested script tags going unsanitized:
+
+``` ruby
+#! /usr/bin/env ruby
+
+require "bundler/inline"
+
+gemfile do
+  source "https://rubygems.org"
+  gem "rails-html-sanitizer", "=1.0.2"
+  gem "loofah", "=2.0.2"
+  gem "nokogiri", "=1.6.6.2"
+end
+
+require "rails-html-sanitizer"
+
+def sanitize(input, tags)
+  Rails::Html::WhiteListSanitizer.new.sanitize(input, tags: tags)
+end
+
+input = "<div><script><script></script>alert(1);<script><</script>/</script><script>script></script></div>"
+tags = %w(div)
+sanitize(input, tags) # => "<div>\n<script>alert(1);</script>\n</div>"
+```
+
+This was fixed with https://github.com/rails/rails-html-sanitizer/commit/63903b0eaa6d2a4e1c91bc86008256c4c8335e78
+
+``` patch
+diff --git a/lib/rails/html/scrubbers.rb b/lib/rails/html/scrubbers.rb
+index d6f8ce4..1e6f887 100644
+--- a/lib/rails/html/scrubbers.rb
++++ b/lib/rails/html/scrubbers.rb
+@@ -60,6 +60,11 @@ def attributes=(attributes)
+       end
+ 
+       def scrub(node)
++        if node.cdata?
++          text = node.document.create_text_node node.text
++          node.replace text
++          return CONTINUE
++        end
+         return CONTINUE if skip_node?(node)
+ 
+         unless keep_node?(node)
+@@ -76,7 +81,7 @@ def allowed_node?(node)
+       end
+ 
+       def skip_node?(node)
+-        node.text? || node.cdata?
++        node.text?
+       end
+ 
+       def scrub_attribute?(name)
+```
+
+which changed the behavior to:
+
+``` ruby
+#! /usr/bin/env ruby
+
+require "bundler/inline"
+
+gemfile do
+  source "https://rubygems.org"
+  gem "rails-html-sanitizer", "=1.0.3" # contains the fix
+  gem "loofah", "=2.0.2"
+  gem "nokogiri", "=1.6.6.2"
+end
+
+require "rails-html-sanitizer"
+
+def sanitize(input, tags)
+  Rails::Html::WhiteListSanitizer.new.sanitize(input, tags: tags)
+end
+
+input = "<div><script><script></script>alert(1);<script><</script>/</script><script>script></script></div>"
+tags = %w(div)
+sanitize(input, tags) # => "<div>&lt;script&gt;alert(1);&lt;/script&gt;</div>"
+```
+
+Here's how this patch works:
+
+- the `script` tag's CDATA contents are converted into a Text node
+- the parent `script` start and end tags are removed by the sanitizer
+- the Text node left behind is then made a child of `div`
+- as a child of `div`, the Text node will be entity-escaped
+- which means the HTML5 parser receives `&lt;script&gt;...` instead of `<script>...`
+
+
+This works because libxml2's HTML4 parser serializes all CDATA nodes, and any Text children of `script` and `style`, **without entities**,  but Text nodes that have been reparented under any other HTML4 tag **will be entity-escaped**. You can easily see this behavior by writing some code:
+
+``` ruby
+s = "check if <, >, and & are entities"
+doc = Nokogiri::HTML::Document.parse("<div></div><style></style>")
+
+doc.at_css("style").tap do |node|
+  node.children = node.document.create_cdata(s)
+  node.to_html # => "<style>check if <, >, and & are entities</style>\n"
+
+  node.children = node.document.create_text_node(s)
+  node.to_html # => "<style>check if <, >, and & are entities</style>\n"
+end
+
+doc.at_css("div").tap do |node|
+  node.children = node.document.create_cdata(s)
+  node.to_html # => "<div>check if <, >, and & are entities</div>\n"
+
+  node.children = node.document.create_text_node(s)
+  node.to_html # => "<div>check if &lt;, &gt;, and &amp; are entities</div>\n"
+end
+```
+
+
+## 2017-10-10: loofah vulnerability
+
+(Reported to Loofah on 2017-10-10 in https://github.com/flavorjones/loofah/issues/127.)
+
+This "bug" also described a vulnerability related to nested script tags going unsanitized:
+
+``` ruby
+#! /usr/bin/env ruby
+
+require "bundler/inline"
+
+gemfile do
+  source "https://rubygems.org"
+  gem "loofah", "=2.1.1"
+end
+
+require "loofah"
+
+def sanitize(input)
+  Loofah.fragment(input).scrub!(:strip).to_html
+end
+
+input = "<div><script><script src='malicious.js'></script></div>"
+sanitize(input) # => "<div><script src='malicious.js'></div>"
+```
+
+This was fixed in https://github.com/flavorjones/loofah/pull/132 by recursively sanitizing CDATA nodes:
+
+``` patch
+diff --git a/lib/loofah/scrubbers.rb b/lib/loofah/scrubbers.rb
+index 508f6bf..982c593 100644
+--- a/lib/loofah/scrubbers.rb
++++ b/lib/loofah/scrubbers.rb
+@@ -99,7 +99,12 @@ def initialize
+ 
+       def scrub(node)
+         return CONTINUE if html5lib_sanitize(node) == CONTINUE
+-        node.before node.children
++        if node.children.length == 1 && node.children.first.cdata?
++          sanitized_text = Loofah.fragment(node.children.first.to_html).scrub!(:strip).to_html
++          node.before Nokogiri::XML::Text.new(sanitized_text, node.document)
++        else
++          node.before node.children
++        end
+         node.remove
+       end
+     end
+```
+
+This changed the behavior to:
+
+``` ruby
+#! /usr/bin/env ruby
+
+require "bundler/inline"
+
+gemfile do
+  source "https://rubygems.org"
+  gem "loofah", "=2.2.0" # contains the fix
+end
+
+require "loofah"
+
+def sanitize(input)
+  Loofah.fragment(input).scrub!(:strip).to_html
+end
+
+input = "<div><script><script src='malicious.js'></script></div>"
+sanitize(input) # => "<div></div>"
+```
+
+One drawback to this recursive approach is that it's possible to trigger a "stack level too deep" exception in Loofah with sufficient nesting of script tags (see [Uncontrolled Recursion in Loofah · Advisory · flavorjones/loofah](https://github.com/flavorjones/loofah/security/advisories/GHSA-3x8r-x6xp-q4vm)).
+
+
+## 2022-04-05: `select` and `style` parents, `script` payload:
+
+Looking at CVE-2022-32209 ([#1530898 Rails::Html::SafeListSanitizer vulnerable to xss attack in an environment that allows the style tag](https://hackerone.com/bugs?report_id=1530898&subject=rails))
+
+``` ruby
+#! /usr/bin/env ruby
+
+require "bundler/inline"
+
+gemfile do
+  source "https://rubygems.org"
+  gem "rails-html-sanitizer", "=1.4.2"
+end
+
+require "rails-html-sanitizer"
+
+def sanitize(input, tags)
+  Rails::Html::WhiteListSanitizer.new.sanitize(input, tags: tags)
+end
+
+input, tags = "<select><style><script>alert(1)</script></style></select>", %w(select style)
+sanitize(input, tags) # => "<select><style><script>alert(1)</script></style></select>"
+```
+
+In this case, the HTML4 doc's CDATA payload:
+
+``` text
+#(Element:0x5f0 {
+  name = "body",
+  children = [
+    #(Element:0x604 {
+      name = "select",
+      children = [ #(Element:0x618 { name = "style", children = [ #(CDATA "<script>alert(1)</script>")] })]
+      }),
+    #(Text "\n")]
+  })]
+```
+
+is serialized as:
+
+``` html
+<select><style><script>alert(1)</script></style></select>
+```
+
+The states that the HTML5 parser goes through as it parses this are roughly:
+
+- ...
+- insertion mode: ["in body"](https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/parsing.html#parsing-main-inbody)
+  - see "select"
+    - insert `select` tag into `body`
+    - move to ["in select" insertion mode](https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/parsing.html#parsing-main-inselect)
+- insertion mode: "in select"
+  - see "style"
+    - **ignore tag and drop it**
+  - see "script"
+    - **insert `script` tag into `select`**
+    - move to ["text" insertion mode](https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/parsing.html#parsing-main-incdata)
+- insertion mode: "text"
+  - see text tokens
+    - insert them into `script`
+- ...
+
+
+resulting in this HTML5 DOM:
+
+``` text
+#(Element:0x67c {
+  name = "body",
+  children = [
+    #(Text "\n"),
+    #(Element:0x690 {
+      name = "select",
+      children = [ #(Element:0x6a4 { name = "script", children = [ #(Text "alert(1)")] })]
+      }),
+    #(Text "\n" + "\n")]
+  })]
+```
+
+which is equivalent to
+
+``` html
+<!DOCTYPE html><html><head></head><body>
+<select><script>alert(1)</script></select>
+
+</body></html>
+```
+
+**⚠ Browsers will execute this javascript!**
+
+With [the fix in v1.4.3](https://github.com/rails/rails-html-sanitizer/commit/45a5c10) the result is sanitized:
+
+``` ruby
+#! /usr/bin/env ruby
+
+require "bundler/inline"
+
+gemfile do
+  source "https://rubygems.org"
+  gem "rails-html-sanitizer", "=1.4.3" # contains the select/style fix
+end
+
+require "rails-html-sanitizer"
+
+def sanitize(input, tags)
+  Rails::Html::WhiteListSanitizer.new.sanitize(input, tags: tags)
+end
+
+input, tags = "<select><style><script>alert(1)</script></style></select>", %w(select style)
+sanitize(input, tags) # => "<select>&lt;script&gt;alert(1)&lt;/script&gt;</select>"
+# >> WARNING: Rails::Html::SafeListSanitizer: removing 'style' from safelist, should not be combined with 'select'
+```
+
+It's worth noting that this fix relies on the Text node fix for CVE-2015-7580 by reparenting the `style` CDATA payload as a Text child of `select`, so that the entities are properly escaped.
+
+
+## Today: the foreign context vulnerability
+
+Looking at [#1656627 Rails::Html::SafeListSanitizer vulnerable to XSS when certain tags are allowed (math+style || svg+style)](https://hackerone.com/reports/1656627) which describes a similar attack vector to CVE-2022-32209:
+
+``` ruby
+#! /usr/bin/env ruby
+
+require "bundler/inline"
+
+gemfile do
+  source "https://rubygems.org"
+  gem "rails-html-sanitizer", "=1.4.3" # contains the select/style fix
+end
+
+require "rails-html-sanitizer"
+
+def sanitize(input, tags)
+  Rails::Html::WhiteListSanitizer.new.sanitize(input, tags: tags)
+end
+
+input, tags = "<svg><style><script>alert(1);</script></style></svg>", %w(svg style)
+sanitize(input, tags) # => "<svg><style><script>alert(1);</script></style></svg>"
+
+input, tags = "<math><style><img src=x onerror=alert(1)></style></math>", %w(math style img)
+sanitize(input, tags) # => "<math><style><img src=x onerror=alert(1)></style></math>"
+```
+
+In both of these cases, the HTML5 parser is put into a "foreign context" parsing mode that causes it to parse CDATA as PCDATA.
+
+
+### the `svg` case
+
+In the `svg` case, the HTML4 DOM is:
+
+``` text
+#(Element:0x5f0 {
+  name = "body",
+  children = [
+    #(Element:0x604 {
+      name = "svg",
+      children = [ #(Element:0x618 { name = "style", children = [ #(CDATA "<script>alert(1)</script>")] })]
+      }),
+    #(Text "\n")]
+  })]
+```
+
+serialized as:
+
+``` html
+<svg><style><script>alert(1)</script></style></svg>
+```
+
+The states that the HTML5 parser goes through as it parses this are roughly:
+
+- ...
+- insertion mode: "in body"
+  - see "svg"
+    - insert `svg` tag into `body`
+    - move to ["in foreign content" insertion mode](https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/parsing.html#parsing-main-inforeign)
+- insertion mode: "in foreign content"
+  - see "style"
+    - insert `style` tag into `svg`
+  - see "script"
+    - insert `script` tag into `style`
+  - see text tokens
+    - insert them into `script`
+- ...
+
+resulting in this HTML5 DOM:
+
+``` text
+#(Element:0x67c {
+  name = "body",
+  children = [
+    #(Text "\n"),
+    #(Element:0x690 {
+      name = "svg",
+      namespace = #(Namespace:0x6a4 { prefix = "svg", href = "http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" }),
+      children = [
+        #(Element:0x6b8 {
+          name = "style",
+          namespace = #(Namespace:0x6a4 { prefix = "svg", href = "http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" }),
+          children = [
+            #(Element:0x6cc {
+              name = "script",
+              namespace = #(Namespace:0x6a4 { prefix = "svg", href = "http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" }),
+              children = [ #(Text "alert(1)")]
+              })]
+          })]
+      }),
+    #(Text "\n" + "\n")]
+  })]
+```
+
+which is equivalent to:
+
+``` html
+<svg><style><script>alert(1)</script></style></svg>
+```
+
+**⚠ Browsers will execute this javascript!**
+
+Note that this behavior is also demonstrated with a `math` parent tag, but is not a vulnerability as browsers will not execute the contents of `script` tags in a MathML context. (See [SVG11](https://www.w3.org/TR/SVG11/script.html#ScriptElement) for documentation on SVG support for the `script` element.)
+
+
+### the `math` case
+
+For the `math` case, the HTML4 DOM is:
+
+``` text
+#(Element:0x5f0 {
+  name = "body",
+  children = [
+    #(Element:0x604 {
+      name = "math",
+      children = [
+        #(Element:0x618 { name = "style", children = [ #(CDATA "<img src=x onerror=alert(1)>")] })]
+      }),
+    #(Text "\n")]
+  })]
+```
+
+serialized as:
+
+``` html
+<math><style><img src=x onerror=alert(1)></style></math>
+```
+
+The states that the HTML5 parser goes through as it parses this are roughly:
+
+- ...
+- insertion mode: "in body"
+  - see "math"
+    - insert `math` tag into `body`
+    - move to "in foreign content" insertion mode
+- insertion mode: "in foreign content"
+  - see "style"
+    - insert tag into `math`
+  - see "img"
+    - **consider it a parse error**
+    - pop `style` node (close it)
+    - pop `math` node (close it)
+    - **insert `img` tag into `body`**
+    - move to "in body" insertion mode
+- insertion mode: "in body"
+  - see `</style>`
+    - consider it a parse error
+    - ignore it
+  - see `</math>`
+    - consider it a parse error
+    - ignore it
+- ...
+
+resulting in this HTML5 DOM:
+
+``` text
+#(Element:0x67c {
+  name = "body",
+  children = [
+    #(Text "\n"),
+    #(Element:0x690 {
+      name = "math",
+      namespace = #(Namespace:0x6a4 { prefix = "math", href = "http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" }),
+      children = [
+        #(Element:0x6b8 {
+          name = "style",
+          namespace = #(Namespace:0x6a4 { prefix = "math", href = "http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" })
+          })]
+      }),
+    #(Element:0x6cc {
+      name = "img",
+      attributes = [
+        #(Attr:0x6e0 { name = "src", value = "x" }),
+        #(Attr:0x6f4 { name = "onerror", value = "alert(1)" })]
+      }),
+    #(Text "\n" + "\n")]
+  })]
+```
+
+which is equivalent to:
+
+``` html
+<math><style></style></math><img src="x" onerror="alert(1)">
+```
+
+**⚠ Browsers will execute this javascript!**
+
+
+Here we see that the `img` tag data which was originally contained within HTML4 CDATA context (and avoided sanitization of its attributes) has been lifted out of that context by the HTML5 parser, and parsed as a sibling to the `math` element.
+
+Note that this behavior (and the vulnerability) is also present if we replace `<math>...</math>` with `<svg>...</svg>`.
+
+
+# Solutions
+
+## Potential solution 1
+
+Rollback [the RHS fix applied in c871aa4 / 45a5c10](https://github.com/rails/rails-html-sanitizer/commit/45a5c10) and adopt Loofah's strategy (noted described above) of recursively sanitizing any HTML4 CDATA nodes.
+
+### The patch
+
+The code changes, after the revert, for this behavior would be:
+
+``` patch
+diff --git a/lib/rails/html/scrubbers.rb b/lib/rails/html/scrubbers.rb
+index 09cfe95..7f29c12 100644
+--- a/lib/rails/html/scrubbers.rb
++++ b/lib/rails/html/scrubbers.rb
+@@ -61,9 +61,10 @@ def attributes=(attributes)
+       end
+ 
+       def scrub(node)
+-        if node.cdata?
+-          text = node.document.create_text_node node.text
+-          node.replace text
++        if needs_further_escaping(node)
++          safe_text = Loofah.fragment(node.text).scrub!(self).to_html
++          safe_node = node.document.create_text_node(safe_text)
++          node.replace safe_node
+           return CONTINUE
+         end
+         return CONTINUE if skip_node?(node)
+@@ -77,6 +78,11 @@ def scrub(node)
+ 
+       protected
+ 
++      def needs_further_escaping(node)
++        # Nokogiri's HTML4 parser on JRuby doesn't flag the child of a `style` tag as cdata, but it is.
++        node.cdata? || (Nokogiri.jruby? && node.text? && node.parent.name == "style")
++      end
++
+       def allowed_node?(node)
+         @tags.include?(node.name)
+       end
+diff --git a/test/sanitizer_test.rb b/test/sanitizer_test.rb
+index 5bf188e..69eee45 100644
+--- a/test/sanitizer_test.rb
++++ b/test/sanitizer_test.rb
+@@ -581,6 +581,18 @@ def test_exclude_node_type_comment
+     assert_equal("<div>text</div><b>text</b>", safe_list_sanitize("<div>text</div><!-- comment --><b>text</b>"))
+   end
+ 
++  [
++      ["<select><style><script>alert(1)</script></style></select>", ["select", "style"],      "script"],
++      ["<svg><style><script>alert(1)</script></style></svg>",       ["svg", "style"],         "script"],
++      ["<math><style><img src=x onerror=alert(1)></style></math>",  ["math", "style", "img"], "onerror"],
++      ["<svg><style><img src=x onerror=alert(1)></style></svg>",    ["svg", "style", "img"],  "onerror"],
++  ].each do |input, tags, should_not_include|
++    define_method "test_disallow_the_dangerous_safelist_combination_of_#{tags.join("_")}" do
++      sanitized = safe_list_sanitize(input, tags: tags)
++      refute_includes(sanitized, should_not_include)
++    end
++  end
++
+```
+
+### The resulting behavior
+
+The resulting behavior for each of our attack inputs would be:
+
+``` ruby
+#! /usr/bin/env ruby
+
+require "bundler/inline"
+
+gemfile do
+  source "https://rubygems.org"
+  gem "rails-html-sanitizer", path: "."
+end
+
+require "rails-html-sanitizer"
+
+def sanitize(input, tags)
+  Rails::Html::WhiteListSanitizer.new.sanitize(input, tags: tags)
+end
+
+input, tags = "<select><style>div { background: red; }</style></select>", %w(select style)
+sanitize(input, tags) # => "<select><style>div { background: red; }</style></select>"
+
+input, tags = "<style>div > span { background: \"red\"; }</style>", %w(style)
+sanitize(input, tags) # => "<style>div &gt; span { background: \"red\"; }</style>"
+
+input, tags = "<select><style>div > span { background: \"red\"; }</style></select>", %w(select style)
+sanitize(input, tags) # => "<select><style>div &gt; span { background: \"red\"; }</style></select>"
+
+input, tags = "<select><style><script>alert(1)</script></style></select>", %w(select style)
+sanitize(input, tags) # => "<select><style>alert(1)</style></select>"
+
+input, tags = "<svg><style><script>alert(1);</script></style></svg>", %w(svg style)
+sanitize(input, tags) # => "<svg><style>alert(1);</style></svg>"
+
+input, tags = "<math><style><img src=x onerror=alert(1)></style></math>", %w(math style)
+sanitize(input, tags) # => "<math><style></style></math>"
+
+input, tags = "<math><style><img src=x onerror=alert(1)></style></math>", %w(math style img)
+sanitize(input, tags) # => "<math><style><img src=\"x\"></style></math>"
+```
+
+For the safe usage case, the output would revert the behavior change introduced in v1.4.3:
+
+```
+input:    "<select><style>div { background: red; }</style></select>"
+v1.4.2:   "<select><style>div { background: red; }</style></select>"
+v1.4.3:   "<select>div { background: red; }</select>"
+proposed: "<select><style>div { background: red; }</style></select>"
+```
+
+For `select` and `style` parents, the `script` tag has been removed by the act of recursively sanitizing. This is different both from the 1.4.2 (unsafe) and 1.4.3 (safe) behavior, but is still safe:
+
+```
+input:    "<select><style><script>alert(1)</script></style></select>"
+v1.4.2:   "<select><style><script>alert(1)</script></style></select>"
+v1.4.3:   "<select>&lt;script&gt;alert(1)&lt;/script&gt;</select>"
+proposed: "<select><style>alert(1)</style></select>"
+```
+
+For the "foreign element" `script` case, the `script` tag has again been removed by recursively sanitizing, and r-h-s is finally safe from this attack.
+
+```
+input:    "<svg><style><script>alert(1);</script></style></svg>"
+v1.4.2:   "<svg><style><script>alert(1);</script></style></svg>"
+v1.4.3:   "<svg><style><script>alert(1);</script></style></svg>"
+proposed: "<svg><style>alert(1);</style></svg>"
+```
+
+For the "foreign element" `img` case, the recursive scrubbing results in:
+
+- the `img` tag being removed in the case where `img` is **disallowed**,
+- the `onerror` attribute being removed in the case where the `img` tag is **allowed**.
+
+... Disallowing the `img` tag:
+
+```
+input:    "<math><style><img src=x onerror=alert(1)></style></math>"
+v1.4.2:   "<math><style><img src=x onerror=alert(1)></style></math>"
+v1.4.3:   "<math><style><img src=x onerror=alert(1)></style></math>"
+proposed: "<math><style></style></math>"
+```
+
+... Allowing the `img` tag:
+
+```
+input:    "<math><style><img src=x onerror=alert(1)></style></math>"
+v1.4.2:   "<math><style><img src=x onerror=alert(1)></style></math>"
+v1.4.3:   "<math><style><img src=x onerror=alert(1)></style></math>"
+proposed: "<math><style><img src=\"x\"></style></math>"
+```
+
+
+### Backwards incompatibilities
+
+For `style` tags with special characters **there will be a backwards-incompatible change**:
+
+``` text
+input:    "<style>div > span { background: \"red\"; }</style>"
+v1.4.2:   "<style>div > span { background: \"red\"; }</style>"
+v1.4.3:   "<style>div > span { background: \"red\"; }</style>"
+proposed: "<style>div &gt; span { background: \"red\"; }</style>"
+```
+
+However, once Loofah upgrades to HTML5 (hopefully very soon), this goes away and the behavior from `<= 1.4.3` is restored. I don't think this is a reason not to choose this option.
+
+
+### Other failing tests
+
+The behavior difference, more generally, is introducing entity escaping on nested script tags, and I think this is acceptable.
+
+The test changes necessary for this patch:
+
+``` patch
+diff --git a/test/sanitizer_test.rb b/test/sanitizer_test.rb
+index d19063c..69eee45 100644
+--- a/test/sanitizer_test.rb
++++ b/test/sanitizer_test.rb
+@@ -14,11 +14,11 @@ def test_sanitizer_sanitize_raises_not_implemented_error
+   end
+ 
+   def test_sanitize_nested_script
+-    assert_equal '&lt;script&gt;alert("XSS");&lt;/script&gt;', safe_list_sanitize('<script><script></script>alert("XSS");<script><</script>/</script><script>script></script>', tags: %w(em))
++    assert_equal 'alert("XSS");&amp;lt;/script&amp;gt;', safe_list_sanitize('<script><script></script>alert("XSS");<script><</script>/</script><script>script></script>', tags: %w(em))
+   end
+ 
+   def test_sanitize_nested_script_in_style
+-    assert_equal '&lt;script&gt;alert("XSS");&lt;/script&gt;', safe_list_sanitize('<style><script></style>alert("XSS");<style><</style>/</style><style>script></style>', tags: %w(em))
++    assert_equal 'alert("XSS");&amp;lt;/script&amp;gt;', safe_list_sanitize('<style><script></style>alert("XSS");<style><</style>/</style><style>script></style>', tags: %w(em))
+   end
+ 
+   class XpathRemovalTestSanitizer < Rails::Html::Sanitizer
+@@ -366,7 +366,7 @@ def test_should_sanitize_invalid_script_tag
+   end
+ 
+   def test_should_sanitize_script_tag_with_multiple_open_brackets
+-    assert_sanitized %(<<SCRIPT>alert("XSS");//<</SCRIPT>), "&lt;alert(\"XSS\");//&lt;"
++    assert_sanitized %(<<SCRIPT>alert("XSS");//<</SCRIPT>), "&lt;alert(\"XSS\");//&amp;lt;"
+     assert_sanitized %(<iframe src=http://ha.ckers.org/scriptlet.html\n<a), ""
+   end
+```
+
+
+### What about recursion attacks?
+
+Yeah, of course, we need to be sensitive to inputs that would trigger a `SystemStackError: stack level too deep` exception. You can blow the stack on my dev machine at about 685 recursive calls.
+
+We could limit the depth of recursion to about 5. If r-h-s has to go deeper than that, we could assume it's an XSS attack and drop the node from the doc.
+
+Here's a patch that restricts the recursion depth:
+
+``` patch
+diff --git a/lib/rails/html/scrubbers.rb b/lib/rails/html/scrubbers.rb
+index 7f29c12..d37245a 100644
+--- a/lib/rails/html/scrubbers.rb
++++ b/lib/rails/html/scrubbers.rb
+@@ -45,11 +45,14 @@ module Html
+     # See the documentation for +Nokogiri::XML::Node+ to understand what's possible
+     # with nodes: https://nokogiri.org/rdoc/Nokogiri/XML/Node.html
+     class PermitScrubber < Loofah::Scrubber
++      CDATA_SCRUB_RECURSION_MAX_DEPTH = 5
++
+       attr_reader :tags, :attributes
+ 
+       def initialize
+         @direction = :bottom_up
+         @tags, @attributes = nil, nil
++        @recursion_depth = 0
+       end
+ 
+       def tags=(tags)
+@@ -61,8 +64,15 @@ def attributes=(attributes)
+       end
+ 
+       def scrub(node)
++        if @recursion_depth > CDATA_SCRUB_RECURSION_MAX_DEPTH
++          node.remove
++          return CONTINUE
++        end
++
+         if needs_further_escaping(node)
++          @recursion_depth += 1
+           safe_text = Loofah.fragment(node.text).scrub!(self).to_html
++          @recursion_depth -= 1
+           safe_node = node.document.create_text_node(safe_text)
+           node.replace safe_node
+           return CONTINUE
+diff --git a/test/sanitizer_test.rb b/test/sanitizer_test.rb
+index 69eee45..5af00c7 100644
+--- a/test/sanitizer_test.rb
++++ b/test/sanitizer_test.rb
+@@ -593,6 +593,16 @@ def test_exclude_node_type_comment
+     end
+   end
+ 
++  def test_recursive_cdata_scrubbing
++    n = 100
++    input = "<div><select><style>" + ("<script>" * n) + "alert(1)" + ("</script>" * n) + "</style></select></div>"
++    tags = %w(div select style)
++
++    expected = "<div><select><style></style></select></div>"
++    actual = Rails::Html::WhiteListSanitizer.new.sanitize(input, tags: tags)
++    assert_equal(expected, actual)
++  end
++
+ protected
+ 
+   def xpath_sanitize(input, options = {})
+```
+
+### Hmm.
+
+Yeah, after playing with this solution, I'm not wild about introducing recursion and incurring the overhead of multiple sanitization passes.
+
+
+## Potential solution 2
+
+I think there's a simpler fix: rollback [the RHS fix applied in c871aa4 / 45a5c10](https://github.com/rails/rails-html-sanitizer/commit/45a5c10) and escape the CDATA node using `CGI::Escape#escapeHTML`.
+
+
+### The patch
+
+Here's the patch:
+
+``` patch
+diff --git a/lib/rails/html/scrubbers.rb b/lib/rails/html/scrubbers.rb
+index 09cfe95..e3001f9 100644
+--- a/lib/rails/html/scrubbers.rb
++++ b/lib/rails/html/scrubbers.rb
+@@ -61,9 +61,9 @@ def attributes=(attributes)
+       end
+ 
+       def scrub(node)
+-        if node.cdata?
+-          text = node.document.create_text_node node.text
+-          node.replace text
++        if cdata_needs_escaping?(node)
++          replacement = cdata_escape(node)
++          node.replace(replacement)
+           return CONTINUE
+         end
+         return CONTINUE if skip_node?(node)
+@@ -77,6 +77,45 @@ def scrub(node)
+ 
+       protected
+ 
++      def cdata_needs_escaping?(node)
++        # Nokogiri's HTML4 parser on JRuby doesn't flag the child of a `style` or `script` tag as cdata, but it acts that way
++        node.cdata? || (Nokogiri.jruby? && node.text? && (node.parent.name == "style" || node.parent.name == "script"))
++      end
++
++      def cdata_escape(node)
++        escaped_text = escape_tags(node.text)
++        if Nokogiri.jruby?
++          node.document.create_text_node(escaped_text)
++        else
++          node.document.create_cdata(escaped_text)
++        end
++      end
++
++      TABLE_FOR_ESCAPE_TAGS__ = {
++        '<' => '&lt;',
++        '>' => '&gt;',
++      }
++
++      def escape_tags(string)
++        # modified version of CGI.escapeHTML from ruby 3.1
++        enc = string.encoding
++        unless enc.ascii_compatible?
++          if enc.dummy?
++            origenc = enc
++            enc = Encoding::Converter.asciicompat_encoding(enc)
++            string = enc ? string.encode(enc) : string.b
++          end
++          table = Hash[TABLE_FOR_ESCAPE_HTML__.map {|pair|pair.map {|s|s.encode(enc)}}]
++          string = string.gsub(/#{"[<>]".encode(enc)}/, table)
++          string.encode!(origenc) if origenc
++          string
++        else
++          string = string.b
++          string.gsub!(/[<>]/, TABLE_FOR_ESCAPE_TAGS__)
++          string.force_encoding(enc)
++        end
++      end
++
+       def allowed_node?(node)
+         @tags.include?(node.name)
+       end
+diff --git a/test/sanitizer_test.rb b/test/sanitizer_test.rb
+index 5bf188e..5e2bd83 100644
+--- a/test/sanitizer_test.rb
++++ b/test/sanitizer_test.rb
+@@ -581,6 +581,41 @@ def test_exclude_node_type_comment
+     assert_equal("<div>text</div><b>text</b>", safe_list_sanitize("<div>text</div><!-- comment --><b>text</b>"))
+   end
+ 
++  def test_safe_combination_of_select_and_style
++    input, tags = "<select><style>div { background: red; }</style></select>", ["select", "style"]
++    expected = input
++    actual = safe_list_sanitize(input, tags: tags)
++    assert_equal(expected, actual)
++  end
++
++  def test_unsafe_combination_of_select_and_style_with_script_payload
++    input, tags = "<select><style><script>alert(1)</script></style></select>", ["select", "style"]
++    expected = "<select><style>&lt;script&gt;alert(1)&lt;/script&gt;</style></select>"
++    actual = safe_list_sanitize(input, tags: tags)
++    assert_equal(expected, actual)
++  end
++
++  def test_unsafe_combination_of_svg_and_style_with_script_payload
++    input, tags = "<svg><style><script>alert(1)</script></style></svg>", ["svg", "style"]
++    expected = "<svg><style>&lt;script&gt;alert(1)&lt;/script&gt;</style></svg>"
++    actual = safe_list_sanitize(input, tags: tags)
++    assert_equal(expected, actual)
++  end
++
++  def test_unsafe_combination_of_math_and_style_with_img_payload
++    input, tags = "<math><style><img src=x onerror=alert(1)></style></math>", ["math", "style"]
++    expected = "<math><style>&lt;img src=x onerror=alert(1)&gt;</style></math>"
++    actual = safe_list_sanitize(input, tags: tags)
++    assert_equal(expected, actual)
++  end
++
++  def test_unsafe_combination_of_svg_and_style_with_img_payload
++    input, tags = "<svg><style><img src=x onerror=alert(1)></style></svg>", ["svg", "style"]
++    expected = "<svg><style>&lt;img src=x onerror=alert(1)&gt;</style></svg>"
++    actual = safe_list_sanitize(input, tags: tags)
++    assert_equal(expected, actual)
++  end
++
+ protected
+ 
+   def xpath_sanitize(input, options = {})
+```
+
+### The resulting behavior
+
+The resulting behavior for each of our attack inputs would be:
+
+``` ruby
+#! /usr/bin/env ruby
+
+require "bundler/inline"
+
+gemfile do
+  source "https://rubygems.org"
+  gem "rails-html-sanitizer", path: "."
+end
+
+puts Rails::Html::Sanitizer::VERSION
+
+require "rails-html-sanitizer"
+
+def sanitize(input, tags)
+  Rails::Html::WhiteListSanitizer.new.sanitize(input, tags: tags)
+end
+
+input, tags = "<select><style>div { background: red; }</style></select>", %w(select style)
+sanitize(input, tags) # => "<select><style>div { background: red; }</style></select>"
+
+input, tags = "<style>div > span { background: \"red\"; }</style>", %w(style)
+sanitize(input, tags) # => "<style>div &gt; span { background: \"red\"; }</style>"
+
+input, tags = "<select><style>div > span { background: \"red\"; }</style></select>", %w(select style)
+sanitize(input, tags) # => "<select><style>div &gt; span { background: \"red\"; }</style></select>"
+
+input, tags = "<select><style><script>alert(1)</script></style></select>", %w(select style)
+sanitize(input, tags) # => "<select><style>&lt;script&gt;alert(1)&lt;/script&gt;</style></select>"
+
+input, tags = "<svg><style><script>alert(1);</script></style></svg>", %w(svg style)
+sanitize(input, tags) # => "<svg><style>&lt;script&gt;alert(1);&lt;/script&gt;</style></svg>"
+
+input, tags = "<math><style><img src=x onerror=alert(1)></style></math>", %w(math style)
+sanitize(input, tags) # => "<math><style>&lt;img src=x onerror=alert(1)&gt;</style></math>"
+
+input, tags = "<math><style><img src=x onerror=alert(1)></style></math>", %w(math style img)
+sanitize(input, tags) # => "<math><style>&lt;img src=x onerror=alert(1)&gt;</style></math>"
+```
+
+For the case of an actual `style` tag without special characters, this looks OK
+
+```
+input:    "<select><style>div { background: red; }</style></select>"
+v1.4.2:   "<select><style>div { background: red; }</style></select>"
+v1.4.3:   "<select>div { background: red; }</select>"
+proposed: "<select><style>div { background: red; }</style></select>"
+```
+
+For `select` and `style` parents:
+
+```
+input:    "<select><style><script>alert(1)</script></style></select>"
+v1.4.2:   "<select><style><script>alert(1)</script></style></select>"
+v1.4.3:   "<select>&lt;script&gt;alert(1)&lt;/script&gt;</select>"
+proposed: "<select><style>&lt;script&gt;alert(1)&lt;/script&gt;</style></select>"
+```
+
+For the "foreign element" `script` case:
+
+```
+input:    "<svg><style><script>alert(1);</script></style></svg>"
+v1.4.2:   "<svg><style><script>alert(1);</script></style></svg>"
+v1.4.3:   "<svg><style><script>alert(1);</script></style></svg>"
+proposed: "<svg><style>&lt;script&gt;alert(1);&lt;/script&gt;</style></svg>"
+```
+
+For the "foreign element" `img` case (note that it makes no difference whether `img` is permitted):
+
+```
+input:    "<math><style><img src=x onerror=alert(1)></style></math>"
+v1.4.2:   "<math><style><img src=x onerror=alert(1)></style></math>"
+v1.4.3:   "<math><style><img src=x onerror=alert(1)></style></math>"
+proposed: "<math><style>&lt;img src=x onerror=alert(1)&gt;</style></math>"
+```
+
+### Backwards incompatibilities
+
+For `style` tags with special characters **there will be a backwards-incompatible change**:
+
+``` text
+input:    "<style>div > span { background: \"red\"; }</style>"
+v1.4.2:   "<style>div > span { background: \"red\"; }</style>"
+v1.4.3:   "<style>div > span { background: \"red\"; }</style>"
+proposed: "<style>div &gt; span { background: \"red\"; }</style>"
+```
+
+However, once Loofah upgrades to HTML5 (hopefully very soon), this goes away and the behavior from `<= 1.4.3` is restored. I don't think this is a reason not to choose this option.
+
+
+### Other failing tests
+
+There are no other failing tests when introducing this patch, and no known backwards-incompatibilities.
+
+
+### What happens when Loofah moves to HTML5 sanitization?
+
+Here's the difference in behavior for these tests specifically ("expected" is HTML4, "actual" is HTML5)
+
+``` text
+  1) Failure:
+SanitizersTest#test_unsafe_combination_of_svg_and_style_with_script_payload [/home/flavorjones/code/oss/rails-html-sanitizer/test/sanitizer_test.rb:602]:
+--- expected
++++ actual
+@@ -1 +1 @@
+-"<svg><style>&lt;script&gt;alert(1)&lt;/script&gt;</style></svg>"
++"<svg><style>alert(1)</style></svg>"
+
+
+  2) Failure:
+SanitizersTest#test_unsafe_combination_of_math_and_style_with_img_payload [/home/flavorjones/code/oss/rails-html-sanitizer/test/sanitizer_test.rb:609]:
+--- expected
++++ actual
+@@ -1 +1 @@
+-"<math><style>&lt;img src=x onerror=alert(1)&gt;</style></math>"
++"<math><style></style></math>"
+
+
+  3) Failure:
+SanitizersTest#test_unsafe_combination_of_select_and_style_with_script_payload [/home/flavorjones/code/oss/rails-html-sanitizer/test/sanitizer_test.rb:595]:
+--- expected
++++ actual
+@@ -1 +1 @@
+-"<select><style>&lt;script&gt;alert(1)&lt;/script&gt;</style></select>"
++"<select>alert(1)</select>"
+
+
+  4) Failure:
+SanitizersTest#test_safe_combination_of_select_and_style [/home/flavorjones/code/oss/rails-html-sanitizer/test/sanitizer_test.rb:588]:
+--- expected
++++ actual
+@@ -1 +1 @@
+-"<select><style>div { background: red; }</style></select>"
++"<select>div { background: red; }</select>"
+
+
+  5) Failure:
+SanitizersTest#test_unsafe_combination_of_svg_and_style_with_img_payload [/home/flavorjones/code/oss/rails-html-sanitizer/test/sanitizer_test.rb:616]:
+--- expected
++++ actual
+@@ -1 +1 @@
+-"<svg><style>&lt;img src=x onerror=alert(1)&gt;</style></svg>"
++"<svg><style></style></svg>"
+```
+
+There are minor behavioral differences related to where the HTML5 spec allows some tags to exist, but everything is still _safe_. I'm OK with this.