From oak-issues-return-70865-archive-asf-public=cust-asf.ponee.io@jackrabbit.apache.org Tue Apr 23 12:35:01 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [207.244.88.153]) by mx-eu-01.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id 8AE38180621 for ; Tue, 23 Apr 2019 14:35:01 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 17813 invoked by uid 500); 23 Apr 2019 12:35:01 -0000 Mailing-List: contact oak-issues-help@jackrabbit.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: oak-dev@jackrabbit.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list oak-issues@jackrabbit.apache.org Received: (qmail 17801 invoked by uid 99); 23 Apr 2019 12:35:00 -0000 Received: from mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org (HELO mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.139) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 23 Apr 2019 12:35:00 +0000 Received: from jira-lw-us.apache.org (unknown [207.244.88.139]) by mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 5E327E0163 for ; Tue, 23 Apr 2019 12:35:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from jira-lw-us.apache.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by jira-lw-us.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at jira-lw-us.apache.org) with ESMTP id 199F1256E3 for ; Tue, 23 Apr 2019 12:35:00 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 12:35:00 +0000 (UTC) From: "Thomas Mueller (JIRA)" To: oak-issues@jackrabbit.apache.org Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Subject: [jira] [Commented] (OAK-8167) With uneven distribution of ACL restriction across facet labels statistical facet count become too inaccurate MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-JIRA-FingerPrint: 30527f35849b9dde25b450d4833f0394 [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-8167?page=3Dcom.atlassian.j= ira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=3D168240= 78#comment-16824078 ]=20 Thomas Mueller commented on OAK-8167: ------------------------------------- In my view, there are two items:=20 * the security aspect of the current implementation (which [~anchela] talke= d about), and=20 * [~kexu] notes that statistical facet count can be inaccurate (but does no= t provide a possible solution for it). The security aspect, I think we need to properly document it, and ensure it= 's secure by default. As far as I read the relevant documentation at http:/= /jackrabbit.apache.org/oak/docs/query/lucene.html#facets , it is secure by = default. However, I think we fail to document that "statistical" is _also_ = leaking some data. I will document this. However, [~kexu] I don't see how we could improve the situation. Do you hav= e any possible solution in mind? If not, I'm afraid we have to close the is= sue as won't fix. > With uneven distribution of ACL restriction across facet labels statistic= al facet count become too inaccurate > -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ------------------------------------ > > Key: OAK-8167 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-8167 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Bug > Components: lucene, query > Affects Versions: 1.6.16 > Reporter: Kelvin Xu > Priority: Major > Labels: vulnerability > > With the statistical mode, facet count is=C2=A0updated proportionally to = the percentage of accessible samples, which works for secured contents scat= tered across different facets. For edge case where the whole facet (results= ) is not accessible, the count still shows a number after the sampling perc= ent is applied. Even=C2=A0if the number is small, user experience is mislea= ding/inaccurate as nothing would=C2=A0return when the facet is clicked (app= lied as a query condition). > For example,=C2=A0a ACLs/CUGs guarded "private" folder, in which all the = assets are tagged with the same facet value. Non authorized user may still = see this facet with a count but gets nothing when clicking on the facet. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)