bval-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com>
Subject Gitbox missing tags (was: Re: [jira] [Commented] (BVAL-176) setAccessible handling is broken for multithreaded apps with SecurityManager)
Date Tue, 04 Jun 2019 17:27:40 GMT
FYI: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-18565

Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
<https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
<https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance>


Le lun. 3 juin 2019 à 08:51, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com> a
écrit :

> Hello everyone,
>
> Do you know where are our 1.x tags/branches? Lost in svn migration? Should
> we ask infra?
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github
> <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn
> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> De : Tomasz Wysocki (JIRA) <jira@apache.org>
> Date: lun. 3 juin 2019 à 08:48
> Subject: [jira] [Commented] (BVAL-176) setAccessible handling is broken
> for multithreaded apps with SecurityManager
> To: <dev@bval.apache.org>
>
>
>
>     [
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BVAL-176?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16854274#comment-16854274
> ]
>
> Tomasz Wysocki commented on BVAL-176:
> -------------------------------------
>
> I would be grateful for 1.1.x maintenance branch (fabb6c4) and prompt
> release of 1.1.3 to avoid custom version.
>
> I will do a master fix shortly (second PR).
>
>
>
> > setAccessible handling is broken for multithreaded apps with
> SecurityManager
> >
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >                 Key: BVAL-176
> >                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BVAL-176
> >             Project: BVal
> >          Issue Type: Bug
> >    Affects Versions: 1.1.2, 2.0.0
> >            Reporter: Tomasz Wysocki
> >            Priority: Major
> >             Fix For: 1.1.3
> >
> >         Attachments: ReflectionAccessibilityTest.java
> >
> >          Time Spent: 10m
> >  Remaining Estimate: 0h
> >
> > Currently when using security manager field/method accessible flag will
> be reset back to false.
> > This does not work for multithreaded apps due to lack of synchronization
> between threads.
> > The effect is exception while validating due to invalid access to
> protected or private members of target object.
> > Workaround is to make all validated members public or synchronize on
> Validator instance.
> > This issue contains a test case to show the effect when security manager
> is installed and there is no synchronization as well as a patch to 1.1.2.
> > This issue applies to bval2 as well but I haven't made a patch.
> > Below is proposed resolution:
> > Remove reseting of accessible flag when security manager is present
> >
> > And rationale:
> >      This feature will not work without some synchronization on the
> >      reflection data itself in multithreaded environment.
> >
> >      Therefore the feature has been removed due to following concerns:
> >
> >      1. resetting accessible flag for security manager does not mean
> that for
> >      short period of time the flag is not actually set and bad code could
> >      exploit that - therefore resetting accesible back is not really
> making
> >      it unaccessible to other code - this is design flaw. If accessible
> flag
> >      would be per thread it would work much better.
> >
> >      2. since accessible flag is global it would require synchronization
> to make it work correctly,
> >       which is costly. Current implementation just breaks for SM present
> case
> >      - it throws 'inaccessible' exceptions since it does not synchronize
> at
> >      all.
> >
> >      3. there is no saying what would need to be synchronized (probably
> the
> >      field or method reflected instances but it is not specified).
> Therefore
> >      synchronizing it would work only within scope of a single framework
> >      (bval).
> >
> >      4. other frameworks typically don't reset back accessible and just
> keep
> >      the flag set. Therefore any synchronization mechanism specific to
> bval would not cooperate
> >      nicely or at all with other frameworks (like spring for instance).
>
>
>
> --
> This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
> (v7.6.3#76005)
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message