I have patched WOComponentRequestHandler and created a pull request in the 
wonder/integration branch

then you will set the property:

ERXDirectComponentAccessAllowed=false

Amedeo

On 10/apr/2012, at 15:14, Patrick Robinson wrote:

> I'm pretty sure this "feature" is the only mechanism by which a user can 
> request a specific page (or component) by name.  I would want to block 
> arbitrary access to pages as well as prevent spurious session creation.
> 
> But yes, there are ways to mitigate the effects.  If an authenticated "user" 
> is stored in the Session, then you can check for that before performing an 
> action in invokeAction() or returning a response in appendToResponse().  And 
> you *do* have to worry about invokeAction(), by the way: the presence of a 
> senderID in the URL causes the component action handler to initiate the 
> invokeAction phase.  I suppose sessions with no authenticated user could even 
> be terminated at the same time.
> 
> No end to the fun!
> 
> - Patrick
> 
> On Apr 10, 2012, at 2:43 AM, Cheong Hee (Gmail) wrote:
> 
>> Hi Patrick
>> 
>> The rationale I am asking is the way web technology is, I think we may not 
>> be able to block the arbitrary access of web pages.  However, if we could 
>> use user authentication as a way to check, terminate the unwanted sessions 
>> and redirect to another stateless page, the impacts could be reduced. 
>> Correct me if wrong..
>> 
>> Cheers
>> 
>> Cheong Hee
>> 
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Cheong Hee (Gmail)" <[email protected]>
>> To: "Patrick Robinson" <[email protected]>
>> Cc: "WebObjects-Dev Mailing List" <[email protected]>
>> Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2012 12:53 PM
>> Subject: Re: preventing direct component access
>> 
>> 
>>> Hi Patrick
>>> 
>>> This is an interesting old issue.  Just curious, what will be your ultimate 
>>> ideal resolution to this?  Bar the access of the page, or reduce the 
>>> redundant sessions creation or something else ...
>>> 
>>> Cheers
>>> 
>>> Cheong Hee
>>> 
>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Patrick Robinson" <[email protected]>
>>> To: "Amedeo Mantica" <[email protected]>
>>> Cc: "WebObjects-Dev Mailing List" <[email protected]>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2012 4:52 AM
>>> Subject: Re: preventing direct component access
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> That code represents the per-app version of the "conventional wisdom" that 
>>>> I started out questioning, below.  The problem with this is that the user 
>>>> can specifiy a "senderID" (as in the URL I gave there), and then 
>>>> senderID() will *not* return null; in the case below, it'll be "99".
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Apr 9, 2012, at 4:48 PM, Amedeo Mantica wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Try this in your Application.java:
>>>>> 
>>>>> public WOComponent pageWithName(String pageName, WOContext context)
>>>>> {
>>>>> if((context.senderID()==null)&&(componentRequestHandlerKey().equals(context.request().requestHandlerKey())))
>>>>> {
>>>>> log.error("Direct Access attempt");
>>>>> pageName="Main";
>>>>> }
>>>>> return super.pageWithName(pageName, context);
>>>>> 
>>>>> }
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 09/apr/2012, at 21:59, Mike Schrag wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Yeah, you're right ... might be kind of a pain in the butt to fix 
>>>>>> without hackery then :)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Apr 9, 2012, at 3:41 PM, Patrick Robinson wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> But it doesn't even have to have the ".wo" on the end of the page name 
>>>>>>> for this hack to work.  If the app has a "SecretPage.wo" component, 
>>>>>>> then a URL like this will instantiate and return it:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> https://myhost.mydomain/cgi-bin/WebObjects/MyApp.woa/wo/SecretPage//88.99
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> - Patrick
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Apr 9, 2012, at 10:10 AM, Mike Schrag wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> probably just catch any time you have a ".wo" in your URL and throw 
>>>>>>>> ... you could do it in the url rewriter or something. i don't think 
>>>>>>>> there's ever any reason to have a .wo reference in a normal app.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> ms
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Apr 9, 2012, at 10:00 AM, Patrick Robinson wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Yeah, that _does_ sound rather annoying!  :-P
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Is there a perhaps less-annoying way to approximate similar behavior?
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On Apr 5, 2012, at 2:46 PM, Mike Schrag wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> I changed this in WO core, and unfortunately it's kind of annoying 
>>>>>>>>>> to fix without some hackery, but in WOComponentRequestHandler, 
>>>>>>>>>> there's a static method requestHandlerValuesForRequest ... That 
>>>>>>>>>> dictionary has a key named "wopage" in it. If you did some class 
>>>>>>>>>> rewriting (with like gluonj or something), you could change that 
>>>>>>>>>> static method to remove the wopage key ... That MIGHT be enough to 
>>>>>>>>>> do it.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 5, 2012, at 2:39 PM, Patrick Robinson wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> I've stumbled across a wrinkle re: what I had assumed to be the 
>>>>>>>>>>> conventional wisdom for preventing direct access to component pages 
>>>>>>>>>>> via URLs like the following:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> http://myhost.mydomain/cgi-bin/WebObjects/MyApp.woa/-9876/wo/SecretPage.wo
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> It's an old, old WO problem, and I'm wondering what other people do 
>>>>>>>>>>> to handle it.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> I've always figured the best idea is to just configure the web 
>>>>>>>>>>> server to catch WO URLs that end in /wo/(.+)\.wo and rewrite or 
>>>>>>>>>>> redirect them.  Another potential approach is to try to recognize 
>>>>>>>>>>> and catch such requests in the app itself, somewhere like the 
>>>>>>>>>>> Application class's pageWithName.  The problem is, these solutions 
>>>>>>>>>>> don't catch all the sneaky ways of slipping in a back door.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Consider:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> http://myhost.mydomain/cgi-bin/WebObjects/MyApp.woa/-9876/wo/SecretPage.wo//1.2
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> This ends up with Application's pageWithName trying to create a 
>>>>>>>>>>> page with the name "SecretPage".  A new session has already been 
>>>>>>>>>>> created somewhere down inside the component request handler, it'll 
>>>>>>>>>>> have a WOContext with a contextID of 0, and the senderID will be 2. 
>>>>>>>>>>> You'd be hard-pressed to know that you shouldn't allow the page 
>>>>>>>>>>> creation to proceed.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> You could try to change the web server's search pattern to also 
>>>>>>>>>>> catch a slash followed by more characters after the ".wo", but 
>>>>>>>>>>> you'd have to be careful not to disallow sessionIDs that just 
>>>>>>>>>>> happen to end in "wo".  And even if you could reliably block the 
>>>>>>>>>>> above, the hacker could try this:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> http://myhost.mydomain/cgi-bin/WebObjects/MyApp.woa/-9876/wo/SecretPage.wox//1.2
>>>>>>>>>>>  (that is, add more characters after the ".wo")
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Now that doesn't fit the pattern at all, and gets hung up in the 
>>>>>>>>>>> Application's pageWithName, where a way-too-informative 
>>>>>>>>>>> WOPageNotFoundException is thrown.  Of course, you'd catch that 
>>>>>>>>>>> somewhere like handleException().  Doesn't quite seem like the 
>>>>>>>>>>> right approach, either.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> My point here is, there are more ways of hacking a WebObjects URL 
>>>>>>>>>>> than I had previously considered.  Does anyone have what they 
>>>>>>>>>>> consider to be an ironclad solution to this problem?
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> (I hate it when I discover stuff I thought I had dealt with 10 
>>>>>>>>>>> years ago is still biting me.)
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> - Patrick
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
>>>>>>>>>>> Webobjects-dev mailing list      ([email protected])
>>>>>>>>>>> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
>>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/mschrag%40pobox.com
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> This email sent to [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
>>>>>> Webobjects-dev mailing list      ([email protected])
>>>>>> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
>>>>>> https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/amedeomantica%40me.com
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> This email sent to [email protected]
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
>>>> Webobjects-dev mailing list      ([email protected])
>>>> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
>>>> https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/chng34%40gmail.com
>>>> 
>>>> This email sent to [email protected]
>>>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
> Webobjects-dev mailing list      ([email protected])
> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
> https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/amedeomantica%40me.com
> 
> This email sent to [email protected]

 _______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list      ([email protected])
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

This email sent to [email protected]

Reply via email to