[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-10398?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13938137#comment-13938137
 ] 

Daryn Sharp commented on HADOOP-10398:
--------------------------------------

It's unfortunate that AuthenticatedURL didn't use Basic auth so the fallback 
authenticator would only trigger on 401 basic.  We've internally removed 
AuthenticatedURL from webhdfs in 0.23 because server errors would trigger the 
fallback which tacks the username into the query string and tries the request 
again, the jdk transparently attempted spnego again, which often triggered 
kerberos replay attacks and caused the jdk to NPE.

> KerberosAuthenticator failed to fall back to PseudoAuthenticator after 
> HADOOP-10078
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HADOOP-10398
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-10398
>             Project: Hadoop Common
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: security
>            Reporter: Tsz Wo Nicholas Sze
>            Assignee: Tsz Wo Nicholas Sze
>         Attachments: a.txt, c10398_20140310.patch
>
>
> {code}
> //KerberosAuthenticator.java
>       if (conn.getResponseCode() == HttpURLConnection.HTTP_OK) {
>         LOG.debug("JDK performed authentication on our behalf.");
>         // If the JDK already did the SPNEGO back-and-forth for
>         // us, just pull out the token.
>         AuthenticatedURL.extractToken(conn, token);
>         return;
>       } else ...
> {code}
> The problem of the code above is that HTTP_OK does not implies authentication 
> completed.  We should check if the token can be extracted successfully.
> This problem was reported by [~bowenzhangusa] in [this 
> comment|https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-10078?focusedCommentId=13896823&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-13896823]
>  earlier.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)

Reply via email to