well the jms client the put the byte[] into the message uncompressed.  It's
ActiveMQ under the covers that's doing the compression.  So if it had to
deliver the message to a stomp client, I think it's normal if ActiveMQ
uncompresses that data.

On 10/24/06, sileshi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:




Hiram Chirino wrote:
>
>>Amq 4 should not be uncompressing message contents (unless it's sending
to
a
>>STOMP client I think).  Each message has flag indicating if the message
>>content is compressed or not.
> Well, even for sending to Stomp, AMQ should not uncompress the bytes
> message.
> The contract between Java JMS client and Message Broker is to transmit
the
> byte streams to consumers with no alterations. This is true of
> irrespective of
> the consumer is Java JMS and Stomp client.
>
> The thinking is RPC  can be built over Java JMS and Stomp. Thus, RPC
> implmentation
> may have one or more protocol (one protocol envolpes another) encoding,
> and data
> that is compressed using standard or non-standard techniques.
>
> The way to deal with this is by not interpreting/altering the byte
> streams.
>
> Regards,
> Sileshi
>
> On 10/18/06, Holger Hoffstaette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> ActiveMQ 3.x unconditionally uncompresses BytesMessages whose input
>> byte[]
>> was already compressed with the JDK-builtin GZip stuff. This is
obviously
>> wrong since the compressed original byte[] should come out on the other
>> end, not the huge uncompressed payload. Is this fixed in 4.x? I figured
I
>> ask before I forward-port. This bug makes ActiveMQ susceptible to DOS
>> attacks, even unintentionally if someone sends a meager 10 MB of
>> compressed XML over the wire that is exploded to >1GB, taking the VM
with
>> it.
>> A simple ActiveMQ-specific prepended tag indicating transport-level
>> compression (or not) would help to distinguish between the two. If this
>> warrants a JIRA please yell.
>
>
>
> You want to distinguish between compressed and uncompressed messages?
> This
> can be done on a per message basis.  I don't think it has anything to do
> with the transport.
>
> thanks
>> Holger
>>
>> PS: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zip_of_death, s/zip/gzip/r ;)
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Hiram
>
> Blog: http://hiramchirino.com
>
>

--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/BytesMessage-vs.-already-compressed-byte---payloads---fixed-in-4.x--tf2469871.html#a6977787
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.




--
Regards,
Hiram

Blog: http://hiramchirino.com

Reply via email to