activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From sileshi <sileshika...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: BytesMessage vs. already compressed byte[] payloads - fixed in 4.x?
Date Tue, 24 Oct 2006 19:54:47 GMT



Hiram Chirino wrote:
> 
>>well the jms client the put the byte[] into the message uncompressed. 
It's
>>ActiveMQ under the covers that's doing the compression.  So if it had to
>>deliver the message to a stomp client, I think it's normal if ActiveMQ
>>uncompresses that data.
> 
> AMQ doing compress/uncompress during routing to Stomp is fine.
> I was talking about already compressed data in byte[] from
> the client.
> 
> 
> On 10/24/06, sileshi <sileshikassa@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Hiram Chirino wrote:
>> >
>> >>Amq 4 should not be uncompressing message contents (unless it's sending
>> to
>> a
>> >>STOMP client I think).  Each message has flag indicating if the message
>> >>content is compressed or not.
>> > Well, even for sending to Stomp, AMQ should not uncompress the bytes
>> > message.
>> > The contract between Java JMS client and Message Broker is to transmit
>> the
>> > byte streams to consumers with no alterations. This is true of
>> > irrespective of
>> > the consumer is Java JMS and Stomp client.
>> >
>> > The thinking is RPC  can be built over Java JMS and Stomp. Thus, RPC
>> > implmentation
>> > may have one or more protocol (one protocol envolpes another) encoding,
>> > and data
>> > that is compressed using standard or non-standard techniques.
>> >
>> > The way to deal with this is by not interpreting/altering the byte
>> > streams.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Sileshi
>> >
>> > On 10/18/06, Holger Hoffstaette <holger@wizards.de> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> ActiveMQ 3.x unconditionally uncompresses BytesMessages whose input
>> >> byte[]
>> >> was already compressed with the JDK-builtin GZip stuff. This is
>> obviously
>> >> wrong since the compressed original byte[] should come out on the
>> other
>> >> end, not the huge uncompressed payload. Is this fixed in 4.x? I
>> figured
>> I
>> >> ask before I forward-port. This bug makes ActiveMQ susceptible to DOS
>> >> attacks, even unintentionally if someone sends a meager 10 MB of
>> >> compressed XML over the wire that is exploded to >1GB, taking the VM
>> with
>> >> it.
>> >> A simple ActiveMQ-specific prepended tag indicating transport-level
>> >> compression (or not) would help to distinguish between the two. If
>> this
>> >> warrants a JIRA please yell.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > You want to distinguish between compressed and uncompressed messages?
>> > This
>> > can be done on a per message basis.  I don't think it has anything to
>> do
>> > with the transport.
>> >
>> > thanks
>> >> Holger
>> >>
>> >> PS: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zip_of_death, s/zip/gzip/r ;)
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Regards,
>> > Hiram
>> >
>> > Blog: http://hiramchirino.com
>> >
>> >
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://www.nabble.com/BytesMessage-vs.-already-compressed-byte---payloads---fixed-in-4.x--tf2469871.html#a6977787
>> Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>>
> 
> 
> -- 
> Regards,
> Hiram
> 
> Blog: http://hiramchirino.com
> 
> 

-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/BytesMessage-vs.-already-compressed-byte---payloads---fixed-in-4.x--tf2469871.html#a6980282
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


Mime
View raw message