Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of trawick@gmail.com designates
 209.85.220.227 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=WMn2V55YzW1Tg4e1VFgwEcc9ELEfwX82MYj0lPIFX2fxtAPle/7ODpyv7p9GQoltnj
         tFoRkIYairrx2DSUcsmUMDs2PUensTZzMdF6xwRZrc0SRI6bkVHAbY6Y7toS7+QoXjjL
         XTQXVNvtEeBSRgUh67W3SZEA6UDRI8la7A/EU=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4ACF4FFA.3070400@onelan.co.uk>
References: <4ACD95C5.4090800@rowe-clan.net> <4ACF4CF5.6030200@onelan.co.uk>
	 <4ACF4FFA.3070400@onelan.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 11:04:17 -0400
Message-ID: <cc67648e0910090804x237a59dbv7d907e1ab0856735@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [VOTE] release httpd mod_fcgid-2.3.4
From: Jeff Trawick <trawick@gmail.com>
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 11:00 AM, Barry Scott <barry.scott@onelan.co.uk> wro=
te:
> Barry Scott wrote:
>>
>> William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>> > Thanks to Jeff's catch, we scuttled 2.3.3. =A0We have yet another
>> > candidate
>> > for your consideration. =A0Please fetch up the newly minted
>> > mod_fcgid-2.3.4.tar.gz
>> > (or .tar.bz2) or the win32/netware suitable package
>> > mod_fcgid-2.3.3-crlf.zip from:
>> >
>> > =A0 http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/mod_fcgid/
>> >
>> > review, take it for a spin, and cast your choice
>> >
>> > =A0 [ ] -1 for any release of 2.3.4 (regressed from 2.3.1?)
>> > =A0 [ ] +1 to release as 2.3.4-beta
>> > =A0 [ ] +1 to release as 2.3.4-GA
>> >
>> > For getting started,
>> >
>> > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/mod_fcgid/tags/2.3.4/README-FCGI=
D
>> >
>> >
>>
>> Further testing of our application has shown up a problem.
>>
>> With the following configuration we are seeing the request body
>> of POST messages get stripped out if FcgidAuthorizer is used for
>> Location /player. =A0If we comment out the "Require onelan magic" the
>> POSTs work.
>>
>> Have I misconfigured or is this a bug in mod_fcgid?
>>
>> Barry
>>
>>
>> ...
>> LoadModule fcgid_module modules/mod_fcgid.so
>>
>> FcgidCmdOptions /usr/local/onelan/html/dsmauthorizer.fcgi MaxProcesses 1
>> FcgidCmdOptions /usr/local/onelan/html/dsm.fcgi MaxProcesses 1
>> FcgidCmdOptions /usr/local/onelan/html/dsmxml.fcgi MaxProcesses 1
>>
>>
>> <VirtualHost *:80>
>>
>> =A0 #+ Rewrite Web API Rules
>> =A0 RewriteEngine on
>>
>> =A0 # security - deny TRACE and TRACK requests
>> =A0 RewriteCond %{REQUEST_METHOD} ^(TRACE|TRACK)
>> =A0 RewriteRule .* - [F]
>> =A0 #- Rewrite Web API Rules
>>
>> =A0 #+ Rewrite Web API Rules
>> =A0 # make the URLs hide the use of dsm.fcgi
>> =A0 RewriteRule ^/$ /dsm.fcgi [L]
>> =A0 RewriteRule ^/(status|options|organisation|tools|setup|help)($|.*$)
>> /dsm.fcgi/$1$2 [L]
>> =A0 #- Rewrite Web API Rules
>>
>> =A0 #+ Rewrite XML API Rules
>> =A0 # make the URLs hide the use of dsmxml.fcgi
>> =A0 RewriteRule ^/(XML)($|.*$) /dsmxml.fcgi/$1$2 [L]
>> =A0 #- Rewrite XML API Rules
>>
>> =A0 #+ Rewrite VPN
>> =A0 ReWriteMap ntb_ip_address
>> prg:/usr/local/onelan/dsm/bin/vpn_lookup_ip_address
>> =A0 RewriteRule ^/player/(\d+)\.(.*)
>> http://${ntb_ip_address:$1}:8080/player/$1.$2 [P]
>> =A0 #- Rewrite VPN
>>
>> =A0 #+ Locations Web VPN API
>> =A0 <Location /player>
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 #+ HTTP auth file
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 Order allow,deny
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 Allow from all
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 AuthType Digest
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 AuthName "Manager System"
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 AuthGroupFile /etc/onelan/common/http.group
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 AuthUserFile /etc/onelan/common/http.passwd
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 Require onelan magic
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 #- HTTP auth file
>>
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 FcgidAuthorizer /usr/local/onelan/html/dsmauthorizer.fcgi
>> =A0 </Location>
>> </VirtualHost>
>>
>>
>
> Looking at bridge_request we see the code is reading the input buckets
> and feeding then to the Authorizer.
>
> It seems to us that:
>
> Either this must not happen if the fcgid is an authorizer
> or the buckets must be put back for whatever handles
> the POST to process.

yeah; looks like bridge_request() doesn't look at role (FCGI_RESPONDER
vs. FCGID_AUTHORIZER)

(unless you think this is a regression, start a new thread and/or open
a Bugzilla entry)