I'm using Spring MVC and I have a REST API.
I need some informations, for example, Date, Person ... but I have another information where I'll put to add information where will be text.
For example:
/addtimesheetjson/{idusuario}/{data}/{latitude}/{longitude}/{other}
{other} can be (for example): lorem/ipsum/dolar/ -- the user can put any text there.
When the user sends the information, my system will give error because there are a lot "/".
My question is, how can I pass text where my Spring MVC understand that "/" is information instead of a path of my REST?
Spring will not handle your case very well and escaping doesn't solve it unfortunately. You will need to find another way to pass the value of other. You can add a header to the request e.g. X-OTHER: /lorem/ipsum/dolar
Related
I'm trying to migrate my ASPX site to Kentico, and as part of my task I'm migrating URLs. I need to preserve my URL structure, so I need to keep URLs which look like : "foo.com/bar.aspx?pageid=1".
I checked page's "URLs" property tried to use wildcards, some patterns like /bar/{pageid}- /bar/{?pageid?}-, etc but Kentico always replaces question marks.
Is there a way to achieve that via the admin interface?
You don't need to do anything in order to use "foo.com/bar.aspx?pageid=1" url.
Create a page under the root and call it bar, so you'll get a page # foo.com/bar.aspx. Kentico and/or .net does not care what you add to a url after question mark, so foo.com/bar.aspx?pageid=1 will work as well as foo.com/bar.aspx?someparam=sdf, or foo.com/bar.aspx?id=1&p=3&t=3.
You may (or may not) implement some functionality based on query string (e.g. paging), so it will parse query string and act in appropriate way.
By default Kentico UI does not handle adding URL aliases with URL parameters like you show. There is an article on the DevNet for a URL Redirection module which has code you can import into your site to allow you to perform these redirects within the Kentico UI. I'd suggest using this approach.
Unfortunately, I can't share a code sample since it's an article but it also has a link to download the code too. This appears to only be coded for Kentico 8.2 right now but I'm guessing you could do some work to make it work for other versions if you needed.
I think there are few concepts that you are clubbing here. I will start with your line code here
/bar/{pageid} - {pageid} is a positional parameter in Kentico's language if you choose to use dynamic URLS based on patterns. SO if you have a code that relies on pageid parameter to fetch some data then Kentico will pass that value. E.g in case of /bar/420, it will pass pageid as 420 different web parts on your template
/bar/{?pageid?} - This will search for query string parameter "pageid" on the request URL and replace its value here. So if you passed foo.com/bar.aspx?pageid=366, the resulting URL will be /bar/366
The #1 is positional parameter and #2 is the way in which Kentico resolves query string macros.
I hope this clarifies.
I'm using Asp.Net + MVC 4.
I'm working on a REST API, so the parameters are specified in the path part of the url (e.g. /accounts/account1) rather than in the querystring (accounts?id=account1).
I want to be able to query for an account that has a question mark in an ID. The approach is to uri-encode the ID of the account, then use it in the url. However, ASP.NET automatically unescapes this, and my MVC app does not see a difference between a request for "/accounts/%3Faccount1" and "/accounts/?account1".
Is there a way to change this behavior?
Could you double encode the question mark?
I'm working on a REST server. I have an order RESOURCE.
From my understanding the PUT verb should create a new order based on the URL. My question is: How can this work if the resource is new and you don't know the ID of the new order?
I know the debate about POST vs PUT, but I'm quoting the w3 specs for PUT http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec9.html
"If the Request-URI does not point to an existing resource, and that URI is capable of being defined as a new resource by the requesting user agent, the origin server can create the resource with that URI"
In RESTful APIs, PUT is typically used to update a resource or create one if it doesn't exist at the specified URL (i.e. the client provides the id). If the server generates the id, RESTful APIs typically use a POST to create new resources. In the latter scenario, the generated id/url is usually returned or specified in a redirect.
Example: POST /orders/
According to W3C Both PUT and POST can be used for update and/or create.
The basic difference between them is how the server handles the Request-URI. PUT URI identifies the entity and the server should't try to map it to another URL, while POST URI can be a handler for that content. Examples:
It's OK to POST a new order to /order, but not a PUT. You can update order 1 with a PUT or POST to /order/1.
To put it simply POST is for creating and PUT is for updating. If you don't have an ID for an object because it isn't created yet, you should be using a POST. If an object DOES exist and you just don't have the ID for it, you're going to have to search for it using a GET of some kind.
The thing to remember is Idempotence. A PUT (and GET for that matter) is idempotent. Basically meaning, you can hit the same URL over and over and it shouldn't make a difference the 2nd or 3rd time (It edits the data once, and calling it again it doesn't make that change again). However a POST is not idempotent. Meaning, you hit the same URL 3 or 4 times in a row and it's going to keep changing data (creating more and more objects). This is why a browser will warn you if you click back to a POST url.
You say, "don't know the ID of the new order" therefore the following is not true "URI is capable of being defined as a new resource by the requesting user agent", therefore PUT is not appropriate in your scenario.
Where is the confusion? I am of course assuming the Id would be part of the URL.
I'm working in a webforms app that uses routing in .net 4. I've defined a very basic route in global.asax as follows:
RouteTable.Routes.MapPageRoute("myRouteName", "MyRoutePath", "~/RouteHandlers/MyHandler.aspx");
In the codebehind of one of my pages I'm using GetRouteUrl to generate a the URL for this named route as follows:
Response.RedirectPermanent(GetRouteUrl("myRouteName"));
This doesn't produce the expected result of http://sitename/MyRoutePath. Instead it produces http://sitename/MyRoutePath?length=15
The length parameter doesn't seem to hurt but I've spent a lot of time making the URLs look nice so I don't want to see an extra parameter there. Any idea how to disable it?
I encountered this very same issue with just one of my routes using Web Forms this morning and I've got around it by providing a 2nd argument to the GetRouteUrl method, passing in null (as this particular route didn't require any route parameters).
For example:
GetRouteUrl("name-of-my-route", null)
My Url is now clean and is not appended with ?length=15.
Hopefully this might help your situation too.
I am looking for some best practices when is comes to creating EditMoels and updating data in an ASP.NET MVC app. Lets say I have a Url like so /Post/Edit?Id=25
I am ensuring the user has permissions to edit the specific post by Id on the Get request and the same for my Post in the controller. I am using the ValidateAntiForgeryToken.
Questions: Should I include the Id property in my EditModel? If so, Should I encrypt it?
The problem is I can use FireBug to edit the Id hiddedinput and edit a different post as long as I have permission to do so. This is not horrible, but seems wrong.
Any help would be great!
There are several ways to prevent this.
The first - don't send sensitive data to the client at all. Keep the post id in session variables, so the user can never edit it. This may or may not be an option depending on your architecture.
The next approach is to convert the direct reference to an indirect one. For example, instead of sending postids = {23452, 57232, 91031} to the client to render a drop-down list, you should send an opaque list {1,2,3}. The server alone knows that 1 means 23452, 2 means 57232 and so on. This way, the user can't modify any parameter you don't want him to.
The last approach is including some kind of hash value that adds as an integrity check. For example, suppose you have 3 hidden fields in a html page - {userId=13223, postId=923, role=author}. You first sort the field names and then concatenate the values to get a string like postId=923&userId=13223&role=author. Then, append a server secret to this string, and hash (SHA-1 or MD5) the entire string. For eg. SHA-1('postId=923&userId=13223&role=author&MySuperSecretKey'). Finally add this hashed value as a hidden parameter. You may also want to add another hidden field called ProtectedParameters=userId,postId,role.
When the next request is made, redo the entire process. If the hash differs, balk the process.
Security wise, I have listed the options in decreasing order. At the same time, its probably in the increasing order of convenience. You have to pick the right mix for your application.
I don't think you should worry with that, if the user does what you said, i suppose that you'll know who edited what, so if he edits the wrong post, doing as you said, you can always remove his edition rights...
If you can't thrist your users, don't let them edit anything...