river-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Wade Chandler <hwadechandler-apa...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: Fw: Re: Space/outrigger suggestions
Date Tue, 21 Dec 2010 01:13:12 GMT
----- Original Message ----

> From: Peter <jini@zeus.net.au>
> To: river-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Sent: Mon, December 20, 2010 5:38:05 PM
> Subject: Re: Fw: Re: Space/outrigger suggestions
> In untrusted networks  you can enforce DownloadPermission, this prevents 
>downloading code from  untrusted sources.
> In such an environment, you can interop with anyone  who authenticates as 
>anybody safely, since you're only using local or trusted  code.  Introduce 
>Generics into Service API, now you've given an attacker a  means to induce a 
>ClassCastException, using a reflective proxy, an effective  poison pill DOS 
>attack, that can be used to attack multiple clients.
> A  cast is simple enough to do and I always check my casts.

Are you saying you check all fields of your returns? Either way you have an 
error arise. You have some kind of an exceptional situation. Not sure how I see 
this as more of a DOS either way. It is service layer code, so of course you are 
going to code against those calls with a general catch...or should. Other than 
that, just performing the cast there isn't going to be some code run, just the 
exception raised.

On the rest as it relates to generics, oh well, I believe this conversation has 
just run off the track into a lets just prove a point no matter what or 
something else completely orthogonal to the reality. I don't believe the 
generics use implies anything other than there are generics used in a given 
aspect of the API. I think if one wants to use generics and does they are going 
to use them. Seeing them here doesn't change that, but of course that is my 
opinion. I'll just leave it there, and have no interest in talking about 
generics more regardless of what I do or do not know as I feel it has become a 
waste of time. FWIW, I say we do as you suggest and move onto the rest of the 
discussion without talking generics, and see how that goes.


View raw message