Hi,

yepp, you're right, only RRs which are retrieved using
RRF.getResoureResolver(Map<String,Object>) are pushed to the stack.
And JFTR: the stack is required to support impersonation.

Thanks Carsten for answering silly questions :-)
Jörg




2015-06-06 3:55 GMT+02:00 Carsten Ziegeler <[email protected]>:

> Hi,
>
> neither admin nor service RRs are put in the stack, only "user" RRs.
> If you want to update the javadocs, please provide a patch
>
> Thanks
> Carsten
>
> Am 05.06.15 um 09:41 schrieb Jörg Hoh:
> > Hi,
> >
> > When I just reviewed the latest changes in the API package, I came across
> > SLING-3868.
> >
> > While it looks good at the first moment and a really useful extension, I
> > have some doubts regarding its usability and security.
> >
> > Assume, I have a request which is handled by some JSP components; these
> > components rely on some background services, which itself deal with
> > ResourceResolvers and might create their own ones (because they need to
> > access parts of the repository, which require different permissions), or
> > re-use the resourceResolver tied to the request (using
> > getThreadResourceResolver()).
> >
> > If the design and the implementation of the application is good, there is
> > no problem. Because the services use only per-call RRs, and and before
> > returning to the callee, any RR opened in this call is closed.
> > But there are applications, where this isn't true; for example services
> > open a  ResourceResolver on demand and re-use this session for multiple
> > calls (RR is closed on deactivate of teh service). In such cases the any
> > call to getThreadResourceResolver() will return a wrong resource
> resolver.
> > This is a pattern which was (is?) quite popular.
> >
> > Can we put a huge disclaimer on the API docs, that special care needs to
> be
> > taken when using this method? Or even drop the stacking of the RR, so in
> > case of a Request always the RR associated to the the request is
> returned?
> > I agree, that this behaviour is rare (how often are services activated?),
> > but as it can leak an administrativeRR, the impact can be rather high.
> >
> > WDYT?
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Carsten Ziegeler
> Adobe Research Switzerland
> [email protected]
>



-- 
Cheers,
Jörg Hoh,

http://cqdump.wordpress.com
Twitter: @joerghoh

Reply via email to