Hi Florian,

I may have missed the answer to my questions in your detailed problem 
description. But how is this not solved by URL-Encoding?
There was once a bug with URL encodings in Camel. Does this bug still exist? 
What version of Camel are you using?

-Ralf
________________________________________
From: Florian Patzl <florian.pa...@evolit.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 3, 2020 2:49 PM
To: users@camel.apache.org
Subject: Passwords in Camel endpoint URIs and limitations of RAW syntax

Hello,
I'm trying to figure out the best way to handle passwords in Camel endpoint 
URIs in my application.
I know the topic has been cause for Stack Overflow posts, JIRA entries and 
mails but I'm still not sure I've got everything right.
Sorry for the big wall of text, but I think I should explain what exactly I've 
tried and found out on the topic.

The main problem is that the reserved URI characters '+' and '&' (plus and 
ampersand) cause parsing problems in Camel endpoint URIs.
'+' is replaced by a blank, and '&' is treated as the delimiter to the next 
parameter.
An example URI for the password "pwd2+2":
pop3://localhost:3110/?username=test2&password=pwd2%2B2

A relevant post is here:
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/11018987/camel-how-to-include-an-ampersand-as-data-in-a-uri-not-as-a-delimiter/34926623#34926623


Now, the solution in documentation is using the RAW(...) syntax:
https://camel.apache.org/manual/latest/faq/how-do-i-configure-endpoints.html#HowdoIconfigureendpoints-Configuringparametervaluesusingrawvalues
So for example:
pop3://localhost:3110/?username=test2&password=RAW(pwd2+2)

Using that feature means we can no longer treat Camel URIs as pure URIs in our 
application, because the '+' of the password must not be escaped for this to 
work.
But if there's no way around that, we can deal with that.

However, when trying the limits of the RAW(...) syntax, we noticed that it can 
not parse passwords that contain ')&'.
This was covered in the following JIRA issue, and since then there is support 
for an alternative syntax using curly braces: RAW{...}, that I didn't find in 
documentation:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CAMEL-12982
The last comment provides a pretty detailed summary of the options and limits.


The alternative RAW{...} syntax works fine, except for a minor flaw: It breaks 
URI sanitizing.
For example, Camel leaks the '&2' portion of the password 'pwd2&2' in log 
entries like:
pop3://localhost:3110/?password=xxxxxx&2%7D&username=test2

The same problem existed for the RAW(...) syntax:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CAMEL-11269
So the fix should be rather simple, I will check whether there's already an 
issue for that and might even be able to submit a PR for that.

But, more importantly: By checking the passwords for ')&' and '}&' and 
dynamically deciding the RAW syntax to use, we should be able to support any 
password *except* if they contain both ')&' and '}&'.
That is a weird constraint for passwords, but should be justifiable as 
technical limitation.


As an alternative to all of this, I sometimes saw the suggestion to configure 
the component with 'useRawUri':

  *   In DefaultComponent, useRawUri() is hardcoded to false. That means for 
applying that to built-in components (e.g. Mail, FTP) we'd have to subclass the 
components to override the method?
  *   Setting useRawUri on endpoint level does not seem to be supported: 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CAMEL-6230
I tried that for the Mail component and got an error for unknown parameter 
useRawUri.

So, is my conclusion correct that escaping passwords using RAW(...) or RAW{...} 
- depending on the input - is the best approach for handling passwords in 
endpoint URIs?
Or am I missing a different approach to configure the passwords on endpoints? 
I've briefly read up on using property placeholders in URIs and saw that we'd 
still have to use RAW(...) there. So I don't think that helps.
I _think_ completely moving away from endpoint URIs and instantiating endpoints 
in plain Java code would also solve the issue, but that would require a couple 
of major changes in our application.

Best regards,
Florian

Reply via email to