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 (© 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" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
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 ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
