myfaces-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Mark Struberg (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (MYFACES-3652) Define default view key algorithm
Date Tue, 20 Nov 2012 12:34:59 GMT


Mark Struberg commented on MYFACES-3652:

a few more thoughts:

The xorshiftrandom is _only_ predictable if we serialize the _full_ long number to the client.
So lets just cut off the two least significant bytes. Or even from somewhere in the middle.
In that case we still have 48 bits random which is good enough as the sequencer is there as
well. But an attacker doesn't have the seed and thus is not able to generate the next number.

The hit ratio would be:

1 : 2^16 * threadcount * chance_of_other_user_request_inbetween

and a new game with even better ratio on each subsequent retry.

I think even unencoded this is superior to our current sequencer + viewid_hash + encoding

The reason is that any encoding which only generates a low number of bytes can be cracked.
And the entropy of the encoded values is really low: 
* the viewIdHash is easy to predict
* the MAC is stable
* the sequencer is easy to predict too

did I miss something?
> Define default view key algorithm
> ---------------------------------
>                 Key: MYFACES-3652
>                 URL:
>             Project: MyFaces Core
>          Issue Type: Sub-task
>          Components: JSR-344
>    Affects Versions: 2.2.0, 2.1.9
>            Reporter: Mark Struberg
>            Assignee: Mark Struberg
> Currently we have a few different viewkey generator implementations. Those got added
only in 2.1.9. Before that the only had a TicketCounter in each Session. 
> The original implementation also had no viewId in the key.
> If you think about it, then it makes no sense at all to add the viewId. Despite it's
an int hashCode we have 2 problems which completely trashes the purpose: 
> a.) hashCode is not guaranteed to be unique
> b.) the hashCode is always the same for the same view.
> Think about an application with only one xhtml page. In that case the viewId would add
no additional info.
> With 4 pages you would only reduce the collision rate to over 25%. Since the application
will most times mainly hit by a few entry points like index.html you gain barely anything
from adding this information.
> IF we have had problems with any collisions, then we shall add an XorShift random generator
instead of the viewId. Leo, I didn't an issue report for such a problem. Do you have any tip
for me where I can find that?

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:

View raw message