Wouldn't SELinux take care of the serialization exploit?  I mean exploits
come along all the time, which is why SELinux should be in use; assuming
the use of Linux.

On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 2:47 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]>
wrote:

> you can also see the 0-day vulnerability as another step requiring
> configuration with RMI and not with JAX-RS/JSON default usage. Also another
> thing to justify if you get an audit ;)
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Tomitriber
> <http://www.tomitribe.com> | JavaEE Factory
> <https://javaeefactory-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com>
>
> 2016-05-30 10:14 GMT+02:00 Trenton D. Adams <[email protected]>:
>
> > Also, another aspect to all of this, is that we have a moderately sized
> > application, which uses RMI for the business logic.  Converting that to
> > @Stateful EJB, would be a breeze, and we could really be confident it
> would
> > continue working once we've gone through our testing cycle.  I'm guessing
> > that converting it to JAX-RS, could be very painful, error prone, and
> > consume a lot of develop, test, fix, test, fix, test, fix, before we
> could
> > even go live.  Essentially, @Stateful EJB can literally have no code
> > changes to the RMI code, except annotations, and it would work almost
> > identically, except the authentication part of it.
> >
> > Also, OpenEJB certainly adds some nice multicast distributed server
> > capabilities.
> >
> > On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 2:02 AM, Trenton D. Adams <
> > [email protected]
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > That is very interesting.  Apparently Jersey has a proxy client API as
> > > well.
> > >
> > > There has to be some sort of state, even if it's as simple as
> maintaining
> > > that your user is authenticated.  With this proxy client api, is it
> > > possible to have cookies automatically kept, and sent during each
> > request?
> > >
> > > On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 12:23 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > [email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > >> 2016-05-30 7:52 GMT+02:00 Trenton D. Adams <[email protected]
> >:
> > >>
> > >> > On Sun, May 29, 2016 at 1:05 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > >> [email protected]
> > >> > >
> > >> > wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > Hello
> > >> > >
> > >> > > 2016-05-29 20:57 GMT+02:00 Trenton D. Adams <
> > >> [email protected]>:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > > Good day,
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > I've had discussions with people that think JAX-RS should be
> used
> > >> as a
> > >> > > > replacement for technologies like EJB, for making n-tier
> > solutions.
> > >> > Some
> > >> > > > of my main concerns about that would be...
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > - JAX-RS is mainly a structured approach to solving the problem,
> > and
> > >> > does
> > >> > > > not use OOD very well.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Assuming you don't mix local EJB and JAX-RS which are very
> different
> > >> and
> > >> > > that EJB means there remote EJB.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Since it does serialize the payload it is 1-1 with EJB(d), you
> have
> > >> more
> > >> > or
> > >> > > less the exact same constraints there. Then you can use different
> > >> format
> > >> > > over JAX-RS (JSON/XML obviously, but java serialization like EJBd
> > too,
> > >> > and
> > >> > > more advanced formats too)
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >> > ​Yeah, I'm referring to remotable EJBs.​
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > > - Having stateless remote calls is fine for certain types of
> data,
> > >> but
> > >> > > I've
> > >> > > > found stateful technologies remove a lot of boilerplate stuff.
> > >> > Combined
> > >> > > > with good OOD, the savings are even better.  JAX-RS is intended
> to
> > >> be
> > >> > > > stateless, so you'd be required to pass all of the state
> > >> information on
> > >> > > > each call.  That requires a lot more thought, planning, and I
> > think
> > >> > it's
> > >> > > > more prone to development errors, etc.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Nothing prevents you to have a stateful JAX-RS endpoint, you just
> > >> need to
> > >> > > ensure your client maintains the session properly.
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >> > ​Yes, I know nothing prevents you, but the whole point of REST, is
> to
> > be
> > >> > stateless, is it not?
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> Well actually no. JAX-RS is just a nice API on top of HTTP/Servlet
> > layer.
> > >> Then you do what you want. Stateless architectures are super nice for
> a
> > >> lot
> > >> of reasons
> > >> but it is not bound to JAX-RS or EJB where the recommanded practise
> can
> > be
> > >> to be stateless as well.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > I know TomEE supports JAX-RS as well as EJB, JAX-WS, etc.  But,
> if
> > >> EJB
> > >> > is
> > >> > > > better for enterprise software, I'd like to be able to
> articulate
> > >> it.
> > >> > > Or,
> > >> > > > perhaps JAX-RS is best, and I'd like to be able to articulate
> > that.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > Technically both (remote EJB and JAX-RS) are globally the same in
> > >> term of
> > >> > > architecture. In term of ecosystem JAX-RS+JSON/XML is really
> bigger
> > >> and
> > >> > > more standard (you will find clients for all languages in 5mn, not
> > for
> > >> > > EJBd).
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >> > I'm curious, how do you see EJB and JAX-RS as being the same
> > >> architecture?
> > >> > EJB has the capability of maintaining state, and obfuscates the
> remote
> > >> call
> > >> > entirely, while JAX-RS does not.  As far as I've ever seen, it's up
> to
> > >> you
> > >> > to develop the boilerplate code to make the call, even when you're
> > using
> > >> > JAX-RS 2 with the client api.  I mean you could use something like
> > >> retrofit
> > >> > to make it sort of like EJB.
> > >> > ​
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >> Use CXF client factory then you will create a proxy from your JAX-RS
> > >> contract => you hide the JAX-RS calls behind an interface. It makes it
> > >> more
> > >> or less the same as EJB excepted you replaced EJBException by
> > >> WebApplicationException:
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> http://cxf.apache.org/docs/jax-rs-client-api.html#JAX-RSClientAPI-Proxy-basedAPI
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to