tomcat-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Bill Barker" <wbar...@wilshire.com>
Subject Re: Tomcat authorization handling seems not to function according to Servlet 2.4 Spec
Date Tue, 09 Dec 2003 06:03:08 GMT
Ok, I take back my <whine/>.  It seems that they have really made a hash out
of the security-constraints.  Something like Philippe's implementation is
required.  Section 12.8.3 requires that only the 'best match' constraints
are processed, and those in a 'grant' fashion (i.e. you get the least
restrictive privilege of the most restrictive constraints).  Now you just
need to be a rocket-scientist to figure out how your security-constraints
work ;-). So in my example below, a request for /myapp/clients/product1/
will only consider the 'product1' constraint, and ignore the constraint for
'/clients/*'.  If I had added a security-constraint for '*.jsp', then a
request for /myapp/clients/product1/index.jsp would use the 'product1'
constraint, and ignore the '*.jsp' constraint.  Isn't life going to be fun
on the user-list ;-).

This means that RealmBase.findSecurityConstraints is going to have to change
to only pass back the 'best-match' constraints.  At least this isn't an
interface change.  The decision on whether to change the Realm interface, or
move the header processing to AuthenticatorBase is still open.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bill Barker" <wbarker@wilshire.com>
To: "Tomcat Developers List" <tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 9:00 PM
Subject: Re: Tomcat authorization handling seems not to function according
to Servlet 2.4 Spec


> Yes, this looks like it changed between pfd3 to fr :(.
Security-constraints
> now work like 'grants' instead of 'constraints'.  IMHO, this make the 2.4
> security model all but useless.
> <whine>
> It would be natural to configure something like:
>   <security-constraint>
>      <web-resource-collection>
>         <web-resource-name>Client Area</web-resource-name>
>         <url-pattern>/clients/*</url-pattern>
>       </web-resource-collection>
>       <auth-constraint>
>          <!-- Any authenticated user -->
>          <role-name>*</role-name>
>       </auth-constraint>
>   </security-constraint>
>   <security-constraint>
>      <web-resource-collection>
>         <web-resource-name>Product1 Client Area</web-resource-name>
>         <url-pattern>/clients/product1/*</url-pattern>
>       </web-resource-collection>
>       <auth-constraint>
>          <!-- Any product1 user -->
>          <role-name>product1</role-name>
>       </auth-constraint>
>   </security-constraint>
>   <security-constraint>
>      <web-resource-collection>
>         <web-resource-name>Product2 Client Area</web-resource-name>
>         <url-pattern>/clients/product2/*</url-pattern>
>       </web-resource-collection>
>       <auth-constraint>
>          <!-- Any product2 user -->
>          <role-name>product2</role-name>
>       </auth-constraint>
>   </security-constraint>
>
> The way the 2.4 spec is written, all authenticated users have access to
> everything under /myapp/clients/.  To get what I want is now a
configuration
> nightmare :(.
> </whine>
>
> Now back to fixing things.  I sort of like the idea of changing the Realm
> interface so that 'hasUserDataPermissions' and 'hasResourcePermissions'
take
> a SecurityConstraint [].  However, after a GA release, this may be a bit
> much.  Philippe's solution looks a bit over-kill to me, but I'm not going
to
> object if someone wants to commit it.  I'm thinking of moving the
> header-setting stuff out of RealmBase and into AuthenticatorBase.  It may
> cause some custom realms to stop working, but there shouldn't be that many
> for TC 5 yet :).
>
> Of course, I'm volunteering for the code-monkey (&copy; Pier) part of
this.
> Since anyway we go is a pretty big change, I just wanted to get a
consensus
> first.
>
> Opinions, Comments, Flames?
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "philippe.leothaud" <philippe.leothaud@wanadoo.fr>
> To: <tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
> Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 6:43 PM
> Subject: Tomcat authorization handling seems not to function according to
> Servlet 2.4 Spec
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> I am new to Tomcat's mailing lists, and I don't really know if this list
is
> the right place for such a post : excuse me if it is not the case.
>
> I wonder if I didn't notice something which is not a real bug in Tomcat,
as
> it seems to do exactly what developers want it to do,
> but more a difference between the implementation of authorization policy
> (the handling of a Web Application web.xml
> security-constraint elements) in Tomcat5 and what the Servlet 2.4 Spec
says.
>
> Example of the problem (from the Tomcat Jsp-examples WebApp) :
>
> <?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
> <tomcat-users>
>   <role rolename="tomcat"/>
>   <role rolename="role1"/>
>   <role rolename="manager"/>
>   <role rolename="admin"/>
>   <user username="tomcat" password="tomcat" roles="tomcat"/>
>   <user username="both" password="tomcat" roles="tomcat,role1"/>
>   <user username="role1" password="tomcat" roles="role1"/>
>   <user username="admin" password="tomcat" roles="admin,manager,tomcat"/>
> </tomcat-users>
>
> tomcat-users.xml
>
> <security-constraint>
>  <display-name>Example Security Constraint</display-name>
>  <web-resource-collection>
>   <web-resource-name>Protected Area</web-resource-name>
>   <!-- Define the context-relative URL(s) to be protected -->
>   <url-pattern>/security/protected/*</url-pattern>
>   <!-- If you list http methods, only those methods are protected -->
>   <http-method>DELETE</http-method>
>   <http-method>GET</http-method>
>   <http-method>POST</http-method>
>   <http-method>PUT</http-method>
>  </web-resource-collection>
>  <auth-constraint>
>   <!-- Anyone with one of the listed roles may access this area -->
>   <role-name>tomcat</role-name>
>  </auth-constraint>
> </security-constraint>
>
> <security-constraint>
>  <display-name>Example Security Constraint</display-name>
>  <web-resource-collection>
>   <web-resource-name>Protected Area</web-resource-name>
>   <!-- Define the context-relative URL(s) to be protected -->
>   <url-pattern>/security/protected/*</url-pattern>
>   <!-- If you list http methods, only those methods are protected -->
>   <http-method>DELETE</http-method>
>   <http-method>GET</http-method>
>   <http-method>POST</http-method>
>   <http-method>PUT</http-method>
>  </web-resource-collection>
>  <auth-constraint>
>   <!-- Anyone with one of the listed roles may access this area -->
>   <role-name>role1</role-name>
>  </auth-constraint>
> </security-constraint>
>
> <!-- Default login configuration uses form-based authentication -->
> <login-config>
>  <auth-method>FORM</auth-method>
>  <realm-name>Example Form-Based Authentication Area</realm-name>
>  <form-login-config>
>   <form-login-page>/security/protected/login.jsp</form-login-page>
>   <form-error-page>/security/protected/error.jsp</form-error-page>
>  </form-login-config>
> </login-config>
>
> <!-- Security roles referenced by this web application -->
> <security-role>
>  <role-name>role1</role-name>
> </security-role>
> <security-role>
>  <role-name>tomcat</role-name>
> </security-role>
>
> webapps/jsp-examples/WEB-INF/web.xml (excerpt)
>
> I've been adding  a new security-constraint element, separing the
authorized
> roles each in its security-constraint
>
> According to what the Servlet 2.4 says (see below for exact reference),
two
> security constraints on the same
> (url-pattern, http-method) should result in the addition of the given
> authorizations and so in this case,
> users "tomcat", "role1" and "both" should be authorized to access the
> protected resource.
>
> But here, it is the contrary : you can't access
> http://10.160.4.205:8080/jsp-examples/security/protected/ under
> "tomcat" or "role1" identity any more, but you can still using the "both"
> identity : Tomcat has realized the intersection
> of the authorizations instead of doing the union.
>
>
> Analyze of the problem
>
> After inverstigating a while in the code, here is what I noticed :
>
> First,
>
> In SecurityConstraint[] RealmBase.findSecurityConstraints(HttpRequest
> request, Context context)
> (the method begins at l. 445 of the org.apache.catalina.realm.RealmBase
> file),
>
> each and every SecurityConstraint (<=> security-constraint in web.xml)
> containing a SecurityCollection
> (<=> web-ressource-collection in web.xml) containing a url-pattern
matching
> the User's request URI
> and defining a restriction on the http-method used by the user for his
> request is retrieved, using
>
> boolean SecurityConstraint.included(String uri, String method)
> (method starts at line 343 of
org.apache.catalina.deploy.SecurityConstraint)
>
> While only SecurityConstraints containing SecurityCollections containing
the
> url-pattern which is the
> best-match to the User's request URI amongst all the url-patterns defined
in
> web.xml should be retained first, and then amongst
> these remaining constraints we shall keep only the ones defining a
> restriction on the same method (or no restriction
> on the method, as stated in servlet-2_4-fr-spec.pdf, ch SRV 12-8-3, pp
> 100-101)
>
>
> Second
>
> in public boolean hasResourcePermission(HttpRequest request,
>                                        HttpResponse response,
>                                        SecurityConstraint constraint,
>                                        Context context)
> (the method begins at line 501 of the org.apache.catalina.realm.RealmBase
> file)
>
> the restrictions on the authorized groups are analyzed, constraint after
> constraint, and as soon as one constraint is not verified,
>
> response.getResponse()).sendError(
>     HttpServletResponse.SC_FORBIDDEN,
>     sm.getString("realmBase.forbidden"));
>
> is sent to the User : this means that at the contrary of what the spec
says,
> for a same
> (http-method, url-pattern) couple, it's not the union of the
authorizations
> but the intersection that is realized.
>
> Spec : The rules to combine roles are given in servlet-2_4-fr-spec.pdf, ch
> SRV 12.8.1, pp97-98 :
>
>  "The combination of authorization constraints that name roles or that
imply
>  roles via the name shall yield the union of the role names in the
> individual
>  constraints as permitted roles. A security constraint that does not
contain
> an
>  authorization constraint shall combine with authorization constraints
that
> name or
>  imply roles to allow unauthenticated access. The special case of an
> authorization
>  constraint that names no roles shall combine with any other constraints
to
> override
>  their affects and cause access to be precluded."
>
>
> Third
>
> A similar problem as the second one accurs in the call to
>
> public boolean hasUserDataPermission(HttpRequest request,
>                                      HttpResponse response,
>                                      SecurityConstraint constraint)
> (the method begins at line 627 of the org.apache.catalina.realm.RealmBase
> file)
>
> As in the second point, constraints are examined one by one, instead of
> determining globally the policy for all
> the constraints applying for the same (http-method, url-patern)
>
> Spec :The rules to combine user-data-constraints are given in
> servlet-2_4-fr-spec.pdf, ch SRV 12.8.1, p98 :
>
>  "The combination of user-data-constraints that apply to a common
urlpattern
>  and http-method shall yield the union of connection types accepted by
>  the individual constraints as acceptable connection types. A security
> constraint
>  that does not contain a user-data-constraint shall combine with other
> userdata-
>  constraints to cause the unprotected connection type to be an accepted
>  connection type."
>
>
> Possible workaround
>
> I've coded a simple workaround (see below), consisting mainly of a class,
> MergedConstraintBuilder,
> whose job is to build a fake SecurityConstraint for each(requestURI,
> httpMethod) couple,
> implementing the selection algorithms described in the spec (as I
understood
> it) :
>  1 - select the best matching url-pattern and retain the
SecurityCollections
> containing this pattern (if any)
>  2 - retaining only the constraint of this first set defining a constraint
> for the http-method (if any)
>  3 - determining the global user-data-contraint (ie transport protocol)
for
> the resulting set of constraints
>  4 - determining the authorized use groups for the set
>
> When the
>
> MergedConstraintBuilder.getMergedConstraintForRequest(SecurityConstraint[]
> allConstraints,
>                                                       String requestURI,
>                                                       String method)
>
> method is called, I use successively these four algorithms to select the
> applying SecurityConstraints, and then
> I first build a fake org.apache.catalina.deploy.SecurityCollection, with
the
> following properties :
>     - String name       :
>     - String[] patterns :  an array of Strings containing only one String,
> the request URI
>     - String[] methods  :  an array of Strings containing only one String,
> the request method
>
> Once the SecurityCollection built, I construct over it a fake
> SecurityConstraint with the folowing properties :
>     - boolean allRoles                  :  appropriately set by the fourth
> algorithm
>     - boolean authConstraint            :  appropriately set by the fourth
> algorithm
>     - String[] roleNames                :  appropriately set by the fourth
> algorithm
>     - String userConstraint             :  the the global
> user-data-contraint as returned by the third algorithm
>     - SecurityCollection[] collections  :  an array containing a single
> element, the previously determined
>
> fake SecurityCollection
>
> and I return it encapsulated in an array of SecurityConstraints, the goal
of
> tis encapsulation being to avoid breaking
> org.apache.catalina.realm.RealmBase existing code.
>
>
> In order to put this piece of code to work, we have to have
> org.apache.catalina.realm.RealmBase invoke it :
> I have so added MergedConstraintBuilder in the org.apache.catalina.realm
> package, I've modified the
> public SecurityConstraint[] findSecurityConstraints(HttpRequest request,
> Context context) method of
> RealmBase (see just below), and I also added three short utilities methods
> in org.apache.catalina.deploy.SecurityCollection
> (these utilities are in charge to retrieve the best matching url-pattern)
>
> I didn't do extensive testing, but the spec examples work (and some more,
> too ;))
>
> I don't know if the difference with the spec is a will or not, so I don't
> know if this will help
>
> Anyway, it was fun
>
> Philippe (philippe.leothaud@wanadoo.fr)
>
> Note : the fake SecurityConstraints could actually be cached, so that the
> computation
> is done only once for a (URI, http-method) couple : I've got another
version
> of the MergedConstraintBuilder providing
> an implementation of this strategy.
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> --------------------------
> Changed SecurityConstraint[] findSecurityConstraints(HttpRequest request,
> Context context)
> method in org.apache.catalina.realm.RealmBase (starting at line 438)
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> --------------------------
>     /** l.438 org.apache.catalina.realm.RealmBase
>      *
>      * Return the SecurityConstraints 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
>      * @param context Context the Request is mapped to
>      */
>     public SecurityConstraint[] findSecurityConstraints(HttpRequest
request,
> Context context) {
>
>         // Are there any defined security constraints?
>         SecurityConstraint constraints[] = context.findConstraints();
>         if ((constraints == null) || (constraints.length == 0)) {
>             if (log.isDebugEnabled())
>              log.debug("  No applicable constraints defined");
>             return (null);
>         }
>
>         HttpServletRequest hreq = (HttpServletRequest)
request.getRequest();
>         String uri = request.getDecodedRequestURI();
>         String contextPath = hreq.getContextPath();
>         if (contextPath.length() > 0) uri =
> uri.substring(contextPath.length());
>         String method = hreq.getMethod();
>
>      MergedConstraintBuilder builder = new MergedConstraintBuilder ();
>      return getMergedConstraintForRequest(allConstraints, uri, method);
>         // Check each defined security constraint
>     }
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> --------------------------
>
>
>  -------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> ---------------------------
>  Methods to be added to the org.apache.catalina.deploy.SecurityCollection
> class
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> --------------------------
>   /**
>   * Builds and returns the <code>List</code> of all the
> <code>SecurityCollection</code>s
>   * part of this <code>SecurityConstraint</code> and containing amongst
> their
>   * <code>url-pattern</code>s at least one pattern matching exactly the
> given requestURI.
>   *
>   * @param requestURI : the URI to match exactly
>   * @return           : the <code>List</code> of the
> <code>SecurityCollection</code>s
>   *                     containing a pattern matching this URI
>   */
>  public List getExactMatchingWebCollections(String requestURI) {
>   List exactMatchingCollections = null;
>   for (int i = 0; i < collections.length; i++) {
>    String patterns[] = collections[i].getPatterns();
>    for (int j = 0; j < patterns.length; j++) {
>     if (requestURI.equals(patterns[j])) {
>      if(exactMatchingCollections == null) {
>       exactMatchingCollections = new ArrayList();
>      }
>      exactMatchingCollections.add(collections[i]);
>      break;
>     }
>    }
>   }
>   return exactMatchingWebCollections;
>  }
>
>  /**
>   * Builds and returns the <code>List</code> of all the
> <code>SecurityCollection</code>s
>   * part of this <code>SecurityConstraint</code> and containing amongst
> their
>   * <code>url-pattern</code>s at least one pattern matching exactly the
> given URI's bestMatch.
>   *
>   * @param bestMatch : the URI's bestMatch to match exactly
>   * @return          : the <code>List</code> of the
> <code>SecurityCollection</code>s
>   *                    containing a pattern matching this URI's bestMatch
>   */
>  public List getMatchingWebCollections(String bestMatch) {
>   List matchingCollections = null;
>   for (int i = 0; i < collections.length; i++) {
>    String patterns[] = collections[i].getPatterns();
>    for (int j = 0; j < patterns.length; j++) {
>     if (bestMatch.equals(patterns[j])) {
>      if(matchingCollections == null) {
>       matchingCollections = new ArrayList();
>      }
>      matchingCollections.add(collections[i]);
>      break;
>     }
>    }
>   }
>   return matchingCollections;
>  }
>
>  /**
>   * Gets <code>url-pattern</code> which is the best match to the given
URI,
> amongst
>   * all the <code>SecurityCollection</code>s part of this
> <code>SecurityConstraint</code>
>   *
>   * @param requestURI : the URI's to match best
>   * @return           : the <code>String</code> representation of the
> <code>url-pattern</code>
>   *                     which is best matching the given URI, amongst all
> the patterns of all the
>   *                     <code>SecurityCollection</code>s of this
> <code>SecurityConstraint</code>
>   */
>  public String getBestMatch(String requestURI) {
>   String bestMatch = "";
>   for (int i = 0; i < collections.length; i++) {
>    String patterns[] = collections[i].getPatterns();
>    for (int j = 0; j < patterns.length; j++) {
>     if (matchPattern(requestURI, patterns[j])) {
>      if(patterns[j].length() > bestMatch.length())
>       bestMatch = patterns[j];
>     }
>    }
>   }
>   return bestMatch;
>  }
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> --------------------------
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> --------------------------
> Class MergedConstraintBuilder, to be added in the
org.apache.catalina.realm
> package
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> --------------------------
> package org.apache.catalina.realm;
>
> import java.util.Collection;
> import java.util.HashMap;
> import java.util.Iterator;
> import java.util.List;
> import java.util.Map;
> import java.util.Set;
>
> import javax.servlet.http.HttpServletRequest;
>
> import org.apache.log4j.Logger;
>
>  /**
>   * Builds a custom <code>SecurityConstraint</code> merging all valid
> <code>SecurityConstraint</code>s
>   * for the method and URI that will be extracted from the given
> <code>HttpServletRequest</code>, or
>   * <code>null</code> if there is no such <code>SecurityConstraint</code>.
>   *
>   * The process to determine which <code>SecurityConstraint</code>s are
> valid for a URI and a method
>   * is defined in servlet-2_4-fr-spec.pdf, ch SRV 12-8-3, pp 100-101 :
>   *  1 - "Select the constraints (if any) defined on the url-pattern that
is
> the
>   *         best match to the request URI. If no constraints are selected,
> the container shall
>   *         accept the request." (i.e. the custom Constraint is null)
>   *  2 - "Determine if the HTTP method of the request is constrained at
the
> selected pattern.
>   *         If it is not, the request shall be accepted." (i.e. the custom
> Constraint is null)
>   *  3 -  Determine the user-data-constraint, given that : "The
> characteristics of the connection
>   *         on which the request was received must satisfy at least one of
> the supported
>   *         connection types defined by the constraints."
>   *  4 -  Determine the array of authorized roles, given that : "The
> authentication characteristics
>   *         of the request must satisfy any authentication and role
> requirements
>   *         defined by the constraints."
>   *
>   * After applying this process, the custom
<code>SecurityConstraint</code>
> is created with the
>   * following properties :
>   *  - display-name = requestURI + "::" + requestMethod
>   *  - SecurityCollection[] collection =
>   *          new SecurityCollection[] {
>   *              new SecurityCollection(requestURI + "::" + requestMethod,
>   *          new String[] { requestURI },
>   *          new String[] { requestMethod } ) }
>   *  - boolean authConstraint
>   *  - boolean allRoles
>   *  - String[] authorizedRoles
>   */
> public class MergedConstraintBuilder {
>
>  static Logger logger =
> Logger.getLogger(MergedConstraintBuilder.class.getName());
>
>
>  /**
>   * Special method for integration with Catalina's RealmBase.
>   *
>   * @param allConstraints : all the <code>SecurityConstraint</code>s
defined
> in <code>web.xml</code>
>   * @param req            : the request of the User
>   *
>   * @return               : the custom <code>SecurityConstraint</code>,
> wrapped in an array
>    *                                                   of
> <code>SecurityConstraint</code>s
>   */
>  public SecurityConstraint[] getMergedConstraintForRequest(
>      SecurityConstraint[] allConstraints,
>      String requestURI,
>      String method) {
>
>   return new SecurityConstraint[] {
> mergeConstraintsForRequest(allConstraints, requestURI, method) };
>
>  }
>
>
>  /**
>   * Builds and returns a custom <code>SecurityConstraint</code> merging
all
> valid <code>SecurityConstraint</code>s
>   * for the method and URI that will be extracted from the given
> <code>HttpServletRequest</code>, or
>   * <code>null</code> if there is no such <code>SecurityConstraint</code>.
>   *
>   * @param allConstraints : all the <code>SecurityConstraint</code>s
defined
> in <code>web.xml</code>
>   * @param req            : the request of the User
>   *
>   * @return               : the custom <code>SecurityConstraint</code>
>   */
>
>  public SecurityConstraint mergeConstraintsForRequest(
>      SecurityConstraint[] allConstraints,
>      HttpServletRequest req) {
>
>   // On determine l'URI contextuelle et la methode de la requete
>   String requestURI = req.getRequestURI();
>   String contextPath = req.getContextPath();
>   if (contextPath.length() > 0) {
>    requestURI = requestURI.substring(contextPath.length());
>   }
>   String method = req.getMethod();
>   return mergeConstraintsForRequest(allConstraints, requestURI, method);
>
>  }
>
>
>  /**
>   * Builds and returns a custom <code>SecurityConstraint</code> merging
all
> valid
>   * <code>SecurityConstraint</code>s for the given method and URI, or
> <code>null</code>
>   * if there is no such <code>SecurityConstraint</code>
>   *
>   * @param allConstraints : all the <code>SecurityConstraint</code>s
defined
> in <code>web.xml</code>
>   * @param requestURI     : URI of the User's request
>   * @param method         : method of the User's request
>   *
>   * @return               : the custom <code>SecurityConstraint</code>
>   */
>  public SecurityConstraint mergeConstraintsForRequest(
>      SecurityConstraint[] allConstraints,
>      String requestURI,
>      String method) {
>
>   Map matchingConstraintsAndWebResources =
>       filterConstraintsByURI(allConstraints, requestURI);
>   if(matchingConstraintsAndWebResources == null) {
>    return null;
>   }
>   Collection matchingConstraints =
>       filterConstraintsByMethod(matchingConstraintsAndWebResources,
method);
>   if(matchingConstraints == null) {
>    return null;
>   }
>   // getAuthorizedRoles() takes care of setting the boolean allRoles
>   // and boolean authConstraint appropriately
>   SecurityConstraint mergedSecurityConstraint =
>       getAuthorizedRoles(matchingConstraints);
>   String userConstraint = getUserConstraint(matchingConstraints);
>   SecurityCollection mergedCollection = new SecurityCollection(
>       requestURI + "::" + method,
>       new String[] { requestURI },
>       new String[] { method } );
>   mergedSecurityConstraint.setDisplayName(requestURI + "::" + method);
>   mergedSecurityConstraint.setSecurityCollection(
>       new SecurityCollection[] { mergedCollection });
>   mergedSecurityConstraint.setUserConstraint(userConstraint);
>   return mergedSecurityConstraint;
>  }
>
>  /**
>   * Returns a <code>Map</code> containing the
> <code>SecurityConstraint</code>s
>   * and associated <code>SecurityCollection</code>s valid for the request
> URI (that is,
>   * all the <code>SecurityConstraint</code>s containing at least a
> <code>SecurityCollection</code>
>   * containing the <code>url-pattern</code> which is the best-matching
> pattern for the given URI,
>   * amongst all the <code>url-pattern</code>s defined in the webApp's
> <code>web.xml</code>),
>   * or null if there is no such <code>SecurityCollection</code> (and
> therfore, no such
>   * <code>SecurityConstraint</code>.
>   *
>   * The rules to determine the best-matching pattern for the given URI are
> defined in
>   * servlet-2_4-fr-spec.pdf, ch SRV 11-1 pp 85-86 :
>   *  1 - "The container will try to find an exact match of the path of the
> request to the
>   *        path of the servlet."
>   *  2 - "The container will recursively try to match the longest
> path-prefix."
>   *  3 - "If the last segment in the URL path contains an extension (e.g.
> .jsp), the servlet
>   *        container will try to match (...) the extension".
>   *
>   *
>   * @param allConstraints : all the <code>SecurityConstraint</code>s
defined
> in web.xml
>   * @param requestURI     : URI of the User's request
>   *
>   * @return               : a <code>Map</code> containing the
> <code>SecurityConstraint</code>s and
>   *                         associated <code>SecurityCollection</code>s
> valid for the request URI
>   */
>  public Map filterConstraintsByURI(SecurityConstraint[] allConstraints,
> String requestURI) {
>   if(logger.isDebugEnabled())
>    logger.debug("MergedConstraintBuilder.filterConstraintsByURI() - "
>     + "Checking SecurityConstraints " + allConstraints
>     + " against URI " + requestURI);
>   // Determining valid constraints, checking the constraints' url-patterns
> against the given requestURI
>   Map constraintsAndCollections = null;
>   boolean exactMatch = false;
>   for (int i = 0; i < allConstraints.length; i++) {
>    // First choice : "case-exact-match" url-patterns
>    List exactMatchingWebCollections =
>        allConstraints[i].getExactMatchingWebCollections(requestURI);
>    if(logger.isDebugEnabled())
>     logger.debug("MergedConstraintBuilder.filterConstraintsByURI() - "
>      + "List exactMatchingWebCollections obtained : " +
> exactMatchingWebCollections);
>    if(exactMatchingWebCollections != null) {
>     if(constraintsAndCollections == null) {
>      constraintsAndCollections = new HashMap();
>     }
>     constraintsAndCollections.put(allConstraints[i],
> exactMatchingWebCollections);
>    }
>   }
>   if(constraintsAndCollections == null) {
>    // Second choice : "pattern-match" url-patterns
>    // Determining the best-matching pattern (=the longest amongst matching

> patterns)
>    // We keep constraints containing at least one WebCollection containing
> the pattern
>    // and remove the others
>    String bestMatch = "";
>    for (int i = 0; i < allConstraints.length; i++) {
>     String constraintBestMatch =
allConstraints[i].getBestMatch(requestURI);
>     if(constraintBestMatch.length() > bestMatch.length()) {
>      bestMatch = constraintBestMatch;
>     }
>    }
>    if(logger.isDebugEnabled())
>     logger.debug("MergedConstraintBuilder.filterConstraintsByURI() - "
>      + "bestMatch obtained : " + bestMatch);
>    for (int i = 0; i < allConstraints.length; i++) {
>     List bestMatchingWebCollections =
> allConstraints[i].getMatchingWebCollections(bestMatch);
>     if(logger.isDebugEnabled())
>      logger.debug("MergedConstraintBuilder.filterConstraintsByURI() - "
>      + "partial bestMatchingWebCollections List obtained : " +
> bestMatchingWebCollections);
>     if(bestMatchingWebCollections != null) {
>      if(constraintsAndCollections == null) {
>       constraintsAndCollections = new HashMap();
>      }
>      if(logger.isDebugEnabled())
>       logger.debug("MergedConstraintBuilder.filterConstraintsByURI() - "
>       + "bestMatchingWebCollections List : " + bestMatchingWebCollections
>       + " stored for SecurityConstraint : " + allConstraints[i]);
>      constraintsAndCollections.put(allConstraints[i],
> bestMatchingWebCollections);
>     }
>    }
>   } else {
>    exactMatch = true;
>   }
>   if(constraintsAndCollections == null) {
>    // No matching constraint
>    if(logger.isDebugEnabled())
>     logger.debug("MergedConstraintBuilder.filterConstraintsByURI() - "
>     + "No SecurityConstraint restraining URI " + requestURI
>     + " amongst given constraints " + allConstraints);
>    return null;
>   }
>   return constraintsAndCollections;
>  }
>
>  /**
>   * Returns a <code>Collection</code> containing the
> <code>SecurityConstraint</code>s restraining tne
>   * use of the given HTTP method, or null if there is no such
> <code>SecurityConstraint</code>.
>   *
>   * A <code>SecurityConstraint</code> is restraining the use of a given
HTTP
> method if it contains
>   * at least a <code>SecurityColection</code> containing this HTTP method
> amongst the <code>String</code>s
>   * constituting its methods field (corresponding to the
> <code>http-method</code> element of the
>   * <code>web-resource-collection</code> element in the
> <code>web.xml</code>), or if its methods field is
>   * <code>null</code> or empty
>   *
>   * @param constraintsAndCollections : a <code>Map</code> containing the
> <code>SecurityConstraint</code>s
>   *                                    to analyze, and their associated
> <code>SecurityCollection</code>s
>   * @param method                    : the HTTP method against which the
> <code>SecurityConstraint</code>s
>   *                                    must be checked
>   *
>   * @return                          : a <code>Collection</code>
containing
> the
>   *                                    <code>SecurityConstraint</code>s
> valid for the given HTTP method
>   */
>  public Collection filterConstraintsByMethod(Map
constraintsAndCollections,
> String method) {
>   if(logger.isDebugEnabled())
>    logger.debug("MergedConstraintBuilder.filterConstraintsByMethod() - "
>    + "Checking Constraints-WebCollection Map " + constraintsAndCollections
>    + " against method " + method);
>   Set matchingConstraints = constraintsAndCollections.keySet();
>   Iterator matchingConstraintsIterator = matchingConstraints.iterator();
>   while (matchingConstraintsIterator.hasNext()) {
>    SecurityConstraint constraint = (SecurityConstraint)
> matchingConstraintsIterator.next();
>    List matchingWebCollections = (List)
> constraintsAndCollections.get(constraint);
>    Iterator matchingWebCollectionsIterator =
> matchingWebCollections.iterator();
>    boolean methodIsProtected = false;
>    // Pour chaque contrainte, il suffit de trouver une seule WebCollection
>    while (matchingWebCollectionsIterator.hasNext()) {
>     SecurityCollection collection = (SecurityCollection)
> matchingWebCollectionsIterator.next();
>     String[] constrainedMethods = collection.getMethods();
>     if(constrainedMethods == null || constrainedMethods.length == 0) {
>      methodIsProtected = true;
>      break;
>     }
>     for (int i = 0; i < constrainedMethods.length; i++) {
>      if(method.equals(constrainedMethods[i])) {
>       methodIsProtected = true;
>       break;
>      }
>     }
>     if(methodIsProtected) {
>      break;
>     }
>    }
>    if(!methodIsProtected) {
>     matchingConstraintsIterator.remove();
>    }
>   }
>   if(matchingConstraints.size() == 0) {
>
   System.out.println("MergedConstraintBuilder.filterConstraintsByMethod() -
> "
>     + "No SecurityConstraint restraining method " + method
>     + " in the Constraints-WebCollection Map");
>    return null;
>   }
>   return matchingConstraints;
>  }
>
>
>  /**
>   * Combines all the given <code>SecurityConstraint</code>s to determine
and
> return as a
>   * <code>String</code> the applying user-data-constraint
>   *
>   * The rules to combine user-data-constraints are given in
> servlet-2_4-fr-spec.pdf, ch SRV 12.8.1, p98 :
>   * "The combination of user-data-constraints that apply to a common
> urlpattern
>   * and http-method shall yield the union of connection types accepted by
>   * the individual constraints as acceptable connection types. A security
> constraint
>   * that does not contain a user-data-constraint shall combine with other
> userdata-
>   * constraints to cause the unprotected connection type to be an accepted
>   * connection type."
>   *
>   * @param matchingConstraints : The <code>Collection</code> of
> <code>SecurityConstraint</code>s
>   *                              to analyze and combine
>   *
>   * @return                    : A <code>String</code> containing the
> applying user-data-constraint
>   */
>  public String getUserConstraint(Collection matchingConstraints) {
>   SecurityConstraint mergedSecurityConstraint = new SecurityConstraint();
>   mergedSecurityConstraint.setUserConstraint("INTEGRAL");
>   Iterator matchingConstraintsIterator = matchingConstraints.iterator();
>   while (matchingConstraintsIterator.hasNext()) {
>    SecurityConstraint constraint = (SecurityConstraint)
> matchingConstraintsIterator.next();
>    String userConstraint = constraint.getUserConstraint();
>    if (userConstraint == null || userConstraint.equals("NONE")) {
>     mergedSecurityConstraint.setUserConstraint("NONE");
>     break;
>    } else if (userConstraint.equals("CONFIDENTIAL")) {
>     mergedSecurityConstraint.setUserConstraint("CONFIDENTIAL");
>    }
>   }
>   if (logger.isDebugEnabled())
>    logger.debug(
>        "MergedConstraintBuilder.getUserConstraint() - "
>            + "String userConstraint obtained : "
>            + mergedSecurityConstraint.getUserConstraint());
>   return mergedSecurityConstraint.getUserConstraint();
>  }
>
>
>  /**
>   * Combines all the given <code>SecurityConstraint</code>s to determine
and
> return as an
>   * array of <code>String</code>s the set of authorized roles
>   *
>   * The rules to combine roles are given in servlet-2_4-fr-spec.pdf, ch
SRV
> 12.8.1, pp97-98 :
>   * "The combination of authorization constraints that name roles or that
> imply
>   * roles via the name "*" shall yield the union of the role names in the
> individual
>   * constraints as permitted roles. A security constraint that does not
> contain an
>   * authorization constraint shall combine with authorization constraints
> that name or
>   * imply roles to allow unauthenticated access. The special case of an
> authorization
>   * constraint that names no roles shall combine with any other
constraints
> to override
>   * their affects and cause access to be precluded."
>   *
>   * @param matchingConstraints : The <code>Collection</code> of
> <code>SecurityConstraint</code>s
>   *                              to analyze and combine
>   *
>   * @return                    : A <code>SecurityConstraint</code>
> containing the authorized roles.
>   */
>  public SecurityConstraint getAuthorizedRoles(Collection
> matchingConstraints) {
>   SecurityConstraint mergedSecurityConstraint = new SecurityConstraint();
>   mergedSecurityConstraint.setAuthConstraint(true);
>   String[] groups = new String[0];
>   Iterator matchingConstraintsIterator = matchingConstraints.iterator();
>   while (matchingConstraintsIterator.hasNext()) {
>    SecurityConstraint constraint = (SecurityConstraint)
> matchingConstraintsIterator.next();
>    if(constraint.getAuthConstraint()) {
>     String[] roleNames = constraint.getRoleNames();
>     if(roleNames == null || roleNames.length == 0) {
>      mergedSecurityConstraint.setAuthConstraint(true);
>      mergedSecurityConstraint.setRoleNames(new String[0]);
>      break;
>     } else {
>      if (!mergedSecurityConstraint.getAuthConstraint() ||
> mergedSecurityConstraint.getAllRoles()) {
>       continue;
>      }
>      mergedSecurityConstraint.setAuthConstraint(true);
>      if(constraint.getAllRoles()) {
>       mergedSecurityConstraint.setRoleNames(new String[] { "*" } );
>       continue;
>      }
>      for(int j=0; j<roleNames.length; j++) {
>       String roleName = roleNames[j];
>       // Check if this role is already registered
>       for(int k=0; k<groups.length; k++) {
>        if(roleName.equals(groups[k]))
>         break;
>       }
>       // If not, add it to the role array
>       String[] newGroups = new String[groups.length + 1];
>       System.arraycopy(groups, 0, newGroups, 0, groups.length);
>       newGroups[groups.length] = roleName;
>       groups = newGroups;
>      }
>     }
>     mergedSecurityConstraint.setRoleNames(groups);
>    } else {
>     mergedSecurityConstraint.setAuthConstraint(false);
>    }
>   }
>   if (logger.isDebugEnabled())
>    logger.debug(
>        "MergedConstraintBuilder.getUserConstraint() - "
>            + "String[] groups obtained and added to the returned
> SecurityConstraint : "
>            + mergedSecurityConstraint);
>   return mergedSecurityConstraint;
>
>  }
>
> }
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> --------------------------
>
>
>


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----


>
> 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


Mime
View raw message