tomcat-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Bill Barker" <wbar...@wilshire.com>
Subject Re: [5] Authentication for Overlapping Constraints
Date Thu, 24 Jul 2003 19:38:34 GMT

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jean-Francois Arcand" <jfarcand@apache.org>
To: "Tomcat Developers List" <tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2003 6:20 AM
Subject: Re: [5] Authentication for Overlapping Constraints


>
>
> Bill Barker wrote:
>
> >Tomcat doesn't adhere to the (new) requirements in the 2.4 Servlet-Spec
for
> >handling the case of Overlapping Constraints:
> ><spec-quote version="2.4 pfd3" section="12.8.1">
> >When a url-pattern and http-method pair occurs in multiple security
> >constraints, the
> >applicable constraints (on the pattern and method) are defined by
combining
> >the
> >individual constraints.
> ></spec-quote>
> >
> >I see two ways to address this, but can't pick a clear favorite (hence
> >asking for comments :).
> >
> >1)  Add a method 'List getSecurityConstraints(HttpRequest req, Context
ctx)'
> >to Realm, and have AuthenticatorBase loop through them.
> >2) Have RealmBase create it's own special SecurityConstraint that is the
> >intersection of all of the overlapping constraints, and leave
> >AuthenticatorBase alone.
> >
> >Case 1 has the advantage of being relatively clean from a coding
standpoint.
> >Case 2 would probably require adding a 'void intersect(SecurityContraint
> >sc)' method to the SecurityConstraint class to enable it to construct the
> >correct permissions (and this looks like it would be a non-trivial method
to
> >implement).
> >
> >Comments/Opinions/Flames?
> >
> In Realm, we already have:
>
> >     /**
> >      * Return the SecurityConstraint configured to guard the request
> > URI for
> >      * this request, or <code>null</code> if there is no such
constraint.
> >      *
> >      * @param request Request we are processing
> >      */
> >     public SecurityConstraint findSecurityConstraint(HttpRequest
request,
> >                                                      Context context);
>
>
> Can we modify that method to properly handle the spec?

That is basically my case 2.

I'm leaning in the direction of case 1 at the moment.  It is easier to
implement, much easier to optimize, and for a major-version release we
should be able to adapt the Catalina API to do what the spec requires.  A
custom Realm that doesn't extend RealmBase needs to be re-done for 5.0 in
either case to be complient.

>
> -- Jeanfrancois
>
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >This message is intended only for the use of the person(s) listed above
as the intended recipient(s), and may contain information that is PRIVILEGED
and CONFIDENTIAL.  If you are not an intended recipient, you may not read,
copy, or distribute this message or any attachment. If you received this
communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and then
delete all copies of this message and any attachments.
> >
> >In addition you should be aware that ordinary (unencrypted) e-mail sent
through the Internet is not secure. Do not send confidential or sensitive
information, such as social security numbers, account numbers, personal
identification numbers and passwords, to us via ordinary (unencrypted)
e-mail.
> >
> >
> >
> >------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >To unsubscribe, e-mail: tomcat-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> >For additional commands, e-mail: tomcat-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tomcat-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: tomcat-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>


Mime
View raw message