This Bugzilla instance is a read-only archive of historic NetBeans bug reports. To report a bug in NetBeans please follow the project's instructions for reporting issues.

Bug 108433 - 'Anonymous' security profile support was implemented incorrectly
Summary: 'Anonymous' security profile support was implemented incorrectly
Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: serverplugins
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Identity (show other bugs)
Version: 6.x
Hardware: All All
: P1 blocker (vote)
Assignee: Peter Liu
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2007-06-28 16:16 UTC by Andrey Yamkovoy
Modified: 2007-07-06 21:31 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:
Issue Type: DEFECT
Exception Reporter:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Andrey Yamkovoy 2007-06-28 16:16:04 UTC
As far as I understand the 'Anonymous' security profile was added to allow a WSP to be accessed by both secured and
unsecured WSCs. In this case it should be possible to enable message level security for WS with this profile and not
possible for WSC. Now it's quite the contrary. So, with current implementation this profile can not be used at all.
Comment 1 Peter Liu 2007-06-29 17:21:48 UTC
Will address this for beta1.
Comment 2 Peter Liu 2007-07-06 21:31:28 UTC
Here is an email discussion I had with the AM team with regard to the Anonymous profile:

Peter Liu wrote:
> Hi Malla,
>
> Thanks for the response.  So what you are saying is the wsp configured with Anonymous profile will have to hand the
security
> header itself and indicates that it understood the header.  In other words, the MustUnderstand header exception I
> am seeing is the expected behaviour since my wsp is not handling the security header.  Am I right?
That's correct.
>
> One more thing, does it make sense to configure the WSC to use the Anonymous profile?
Well ideally it really does'nt make sense at WSC, however, that could be just to testing out things with no security but
with security providers configured:-)

thanks
Malla

>
>
> Thanks.
>
> Peter
>
> Malla Simhachalam wrote:
>> Peter Liu wrote:
>>> Hi Malla, Mrudul,
>>>
>>> Could you please explain the usage and purpose of the Anonymous profile? If the wsp is set to use the Anonymous
profile, does the wsc also have to be set to
>>> use Anonymous profile?
>> When a WSP is configured for only "Anonymous profile", then it would just return the SOAPMessage from the WSC to
application. The usage of this profile configuration at WSP is only that if the application wants to process for the
security/read the security headers for whatever reason and the application would have to say it understood these
headers. However, the anonymous profile at WSP could be one of the several supported security mechanisms, so this would
allow not only anonymous authentications but also any supported security profiles. Stripping of the headers would be
done only if it understands these security headers and configured for the corresponding profiles.
>>
>> thanks
>> Malla
>>
>>> So far, this is the only scenario where I can
>>> get this profile to work.   If I use any other profile on the wsc, I get the following
>>> exception:
>>>
>>> javax.xml.ws.soap.SOAPFaultException: MustUnderstand
headers:[{http://docs.oasis-open.org/wss/2004/01/oasis-200401-wss-wssecurity-secext-1.0.xsd}Security] are not understood
>>>
>>> Looking at the log, it appears that the wsp is simply letting the secured request message
>>> through without stripping the security headers.  This causes the MustUnderstand header
>>> fault.
>>>
>>> Peter
>>>

So, in short, the purpose of the Anonymous profile is to allow application to process the security header for whatever
reason. In order for this profile to work, the wsp has to register a handler and handle the security header itself.
Otherwise, you'll get a MustUnderstandHeader fault.

As for whether to allow Anonymous profile on the wsc, since it is alot of work to try to filter out this profile for the
wsc and it doesn't hurt to have this profile for wsc, I am going to leave things the way it is. I am closing this issue
as wontfix.