jackrabbit-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jukka Zitting (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (JCR-3534) Add JackrabbitSession.getValueByContentId method
Date Wed, 24 Apr 2013 13:01:16 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-3534?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13640409#comment-13640409

Jukka Zitting commented on JCR-3534:

> Well, we wanted to make it secure, right?

The main security threat at least as discussed above was to prevent someone form accessing
the contents or checking for the existence of a binary based on its identifier (which can
be predictable). The HMAC already protects against that, as it guarantees that the client
already has another way to access the binary. Otherwise it couldn't have acquired a HMAC signed
by the underlying data store.

Is there some other attack vector that I'm missing?

> Expiry: this is to avoid reply attacks.

I'm not sure I follow. Who's the attacker and what does an expiry value prevent them from

> Without it, the message would no longer have the meaning of "you have access to this
binary" but it would sometimes mean "this is the data".

I don't see a problem with that. Currently that's what the client is in any case doing, copying
the data from one repository to another. The proposed feature here is just an optimization
to that case, so it shouldn't be a problem if in some cases the feature ends up copying the
data instead of just a signed identifier. In fact for small binaries the whole HMAC/identifier
mechanism could simply be skipped, as the data could just as well be directly copied without
notable extra overhead.
> Add JackrabbitSession.getValueByContentId method
> ------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: JCR-3534
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-3534
>             Project: Jackrabbit Content Repository
>          Issue Type: New Feature
>          Components: jackrabbit-api, jackrabbit-core
>    Affects Versions: 2.6
>            Reporter: Felix Meschberger
>         Attachments: JCR-3534.patch
> we have a couple of use cases, where we would like to leverage the global data store
to prevent sending around and copying around large binary data unnecessarily: We have two
separate Jackrabbit instances configured to use the same DataStore (for the sake of this discussion
assume we have the problems of concurrent access and garbage collection under control). When
sending content from one instance to the other instance we don't want to send potentially
large binary data (e.g. video files) if not needed.
> The idea is for the sender to just send the content identity from JackrabbitValue.getContentIdentity().
The receiver would then check whether the such content already exists and would reuse if so:
> String ci = contentIdentity_from_sender;
> try {
>     Value v = session.getValueByContentIdentity(ci);
>     Property p = targetNode.setProperty(propName, v);
> } catch (ItemNotFoundException ie) {
>     // unknown or invalid content Identity
> } catch (RepositoryException re) {
>     // some other exception
> }
> Thus the proposed JackrabbitSession.getValueByContentIdentity(String) method would allow
for round tripping the JackrabbitValue.getContentIdentity() preventing superfluous binary
data copying and moving. 
> See also the dev@ thread http://jackrabbit.markmail.org/thread/gedk5jsrp6offkhi

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

View raw message