jackrabbit-oak-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tobias Bocanegra <tri...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Security Concerns wrt Index Definitions
Date Wed, 13 Nov 2013 19:34:58 GMT

On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 11:08 AM, Jukka Zitting <jukka.zitting@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 12:41 PM, Tobias Bocanegra <tripod@apache.org> wrote:
>> I quickly browsed through the code, and I could not find any
>> mixin type that would allow adding a oak:index node. so how
>> would you define an index on an arbitrary subtree?
> By adding such a mixin?
> The index code itself only cares about the presence of an oak:index
> child node, not the type(s) of the parent node, so it doesn't really
> matter if the node is added as a residual nt:unstructured node, or
> through a mixin type that explicitly defines it.
>> suggest:
>> * create a "oak:Indexable" mixin nodetype,
> +0
>> * and make the oak:QueryIndexDefinition not extending from
>> nt:unstructured, but define it properly.
> Personally I'd even do away with the oak:queryIndexDefinition type
> entirely, and leave the typing (or lack of it) of index definitions to
> the individual index plugins that interpret them.
but then, we should at least define the mixin as a hint for the
plugins of where to look for it:

[oak:Indexable] mix
* oak:index (nt:base)

this also rises the question: how does the index plugin find its
definitions? certainly not via query :-)
maybe by a lookup table in /jcr:system/oak:indexes ?

> The reason why the type currently extends nt:unstructured is to allow
> custom index plugins to support extra configuration that isn't
> explicitly listed in the type definition.
then, the index plugin should be able to provide the nodetypes it needs.


View raw message