----- Original Message -----
From: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> To: "Vojtech Szocs" <vszocs@redhat.com> Cc: devel@ovirt.org, "Oved Ourfalli" <ovedo@redhat.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2014 8:22:06 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] UI plugins - talking with Engine via JSESSIONID now requires separate request header
----- Original Message -----
From: "Vojtech Szocs" <vszocs@redhat.com> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Cc: devel@ovirt.org, "Oved Ourfalli" <ovedo@redhat.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2014 9:18:44 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] UI plugins - talking with Engine via JSESSIONID now requires separate request header
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> To: "Vojtech Szocs" <vszocs@redhat.com> Cc: devel@ovirt.org, "Oved Ourfalli" <ovedo@redhat.com>, "René Koch" <r.koch@ovido.at> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2014 7:47:35 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] UI plugins - talking with Engine via JSESSIONID now requires separate request header
----- Original Message -----
From: "Vojtech Szocs" <vszocs@redhat.com> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Cc: devel@ovirt.org, "Oved Ourfalli" <ovedo@redhat.com>, "René Koch" <r.koch@ovido.at> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2014 8:40:30 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] UI plugins - talking with Engine via JSESSIONID now requires separate request header
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> To: "Vojtech Szocs" <vszocs@redhat.com> Cc: devel@ovirt.org, "Oved Ourfalli" <ovedo@redhat.com>, "René Koch" <r.koch@ovido.at> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2014 7:17:40 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] UI plugins - talking with Engine via JSESSIONID now requires separate request header
Can we have X-OVIRT-SESSIONID header name or any generic term and per ovirt specific instead of generic java terms?
Good question. In general I agree, JavaEE's default "JSESSIONID" naming convention for custom header (or cookie) is not very meaningful in multi app deployment.
However, I'd rather avoid "X-" prefix [1].
[1] http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3561381/custom-http-headers-naming-conven...
Currently, it is the "JSESSIONID" cookie which maps to the session. Currently, "JSESSIONID" custom header is only for CSRF-protection, i.e. to be compared with cookie value (cookie is still required in order to reuse existing session).
AFAIK, Juan plans to support passing session ID via custom HTTP header, as an alternative to passing session ID via cookie. When this gets done, the custom HTTP header should be named something like "OVIRT-SESSIONID".
I do not see any reason why not to use this (or any other non JSESSIONID) name for header now.
Yes, we could also change it now, because JSESSIONID header was introduced only recently by http://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/29681/
However I think this is not really "Engine session ID", but rather "Java webapp session ID" - AFAIK, real Engine session ID is stored inside Java webapp session attribute - see SessionConstants HTTP_SESSION_ENGINE_SESSION_ID_KEY ("ovirt_aaa_engineSessionId").
But we can consider real Engine session ID as impl. detail, so we can rename JSESSIONID to OVIRT-SESSIONID or similar.
As for the cookie name, I'm not aware of any way to change it in JBoss. I think that even Java servlet spec says it must be called JSESSIONID. (But then again, in future I'd like to avoid using that cookie altogether, in favor of using custom OVIRT-SESSIONID header.)
it is not important what session id it is... it can be the jboss now and other later, what important is that we do not change the interface in future, so that the session id whatever it may be is set within header that is forward compatible.
I agree. @Juan, can we change JSESSIONID header to OVIRT-SESSIONID or similar, in scope of REST API webapp? (Also to be used in future instead of JSESSIONID cookie, to associate client request with REST API / Engine session.)
the fact that we have a cookie is nice, may have some value (or not...), but cookie is set by server and sent by client automatically, so naming is not important.
Right, web browsers take care of cookies automatically and other clients can prefer to use custom header like OVIRT-SESSIONID, if they want.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Vojtech Szocs" <vszocs@redhat.com> To: devel@ovirt.org Cc: "Oved Ourfalli" <ovedo@redhat.com>, "René Koch" <r.koch@ovido.at> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2014 8:06:19 PM Subject: [ovirt-devel] UI plugins - talking with Engine via JSESSIONID now requires separate request header
Hi guys,
please be advised, patch for master [1] as well as ovirt-engine-3.5 [2] branch was merged recently. This patch enables CSRF (Cross-Site Request Forgery) protection for REST API session acquired by WebAdmin UI plugin infrastructure.
If you maintain UI plugin(s) and utilize "RestApiSessionAcquired" event handler function, i.e. your UI plugin (JavaScript) calls Engine directly or you pass the session ID to some other system which calls Engine, make sure that any request to Engine contains both:
* JSESSIONID cookie (as today) * JSESSIONID request header (this is new)
For CSRF-protected session [3], REST API backend compares these values and if not successful, it responds with HTTP 403 (Forbidden) which will break the communication with Engine.
As mentioned above, this applies to all UI plugins deployed on Engine WebAdmin version 3.5 and later.
In order to stay compatible with older (unpatched) UI plugins, we could introduce some Engine config parameter to control whether the REST API session for UI plugins should use CSRF protection or not.
[1] http://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/29682/ [2] http://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/29850/ [3] details in commit message of http://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/29849/
Regards, Vojtech _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel