Ambiguous mapping found when using class multi level #RequestMapping urls - spring-mvc

I'm getting the following exception if I use multi level urls in class like #RequestMapping("/api/v0.1"):
java.lang.IllegalStateException: Ambiguous mapping found. Cannot map 'userController'
bean method getUsers()|to {[/api/v0.1]}: There is already 'userController' bean
method getUser(java.lang.String) mapped.
It's like the method level mappings doesn't get into consideration at all.
But it's ok if I put #RequestMapping("/api") i.e. remove the /v0.1 part.
Here is the configuration stripped up to the minimal case:
#Controller
#RequestMapping("/api/v0.1")
public class UserController {
#RequestMapping(value = "/users")
#ResponseBody
public List<User> getUsers() {
return null;
}
#RequestMapping(value = "/users/{username}")
#ResponseBody
public User getUser(#PathVariable String username) {
return null;
}
}
web.xml
<servlet-mapping>
<servlet-name>Spring MVC Dispatcher Servlet</servlet-name>
<url-pattern>/</url-pattern>
</servlet-mapping>
servlet-context.xml:
<!-- Configures the #Controller programming model -->
<mvc:annotation-driven />
<!-- Forwards requests to the "/" resource to the "welcome" view -->
<mvc:view-controller path="/" view-name="home"/>
<!-- Handles HTTP GET requests for /assets/** by efficiently serving up static resources in the ${webappRoot}/resources/ directory -->
<mvc:resources mapping="/assets/**" location="/assets/" />
I'm using spring 3.1. I also tried to set alwaysUseFullPath property to true of the RequestMappingHandlerMapping bean but it didn't change the situation.

Very interesting issue - I checked what could be going on, you are right the "v0.1" is really throwing off the org.springframework.util.AntPathMatcher which creates the full URI path by combining the path from the controller and the path from the mapped method. If it sees a "file.extension" kind of a pattern in the Controller, then it totally ignores the path mapping of the method - this is the reason why your #PathVariable was getting ignored.
I am not sure if this is a bug or intended behavior in Spring MVC, temporary fix would be along what you have already mentioned -
1.To remove "v0.1" from the RequestMapping of Controller and make it without extension say v0_1
2.To put this mapping in the mapped method:
#Controller
#RequestMapping("/api")
public class UserController {
#RequestMapping(value = "/v0.1/users")
#ResponseBody
public List<User> getUsers() {
return null;
}
#RequestMapping(value = "/v0.1/users/{username}")
#ResponseBody
public User getUser(#PathVariable String username) {
return null;
}
}

You should use the #RequestMapping(value = "/{version:.*}/users") to include the dot '.' in the path variable

Related

Spring security Authentication parameter in #Controller handler method [duplicate]

I have a Spring MVC web app which uses Spring Security. I want to know the username of the currently logged in user. I'm using the code snippet given below . Is this the accepted way?
I don't like having a call to a static method inside this controller - that defeats the whole purpose of Spring, IMHO. Is there a way to configure the app to have the current SecurityContext, or current Authentication, injected instead?
#RequestMapping(method = RequestMethod.GET)
public ModelAndView showResults(final HttpServletRequest request...) {
final String currentUser = SecurityContextHolder.getContext().getAuthentication().getName();
...
}
If you are using Spring 3, the easiest way is:
#RequestMapping(method = RequestMethod.GET)
public ModelAndView showResults(final HttpServletRequest request, Principal principal) {
final String currentUser = principal.getName();
}
A lot has changed in the Spring world since this question was answered. Spring has simplified getting the current user in a controller. For other beans, Spring has adopted the suggestions of the author and simplified the injection of 'SecurityContextHolder'. More details are in the comments.
This is the solution I've ended up going with. Instead of using SecurityContextHolder in my controller, I want to inject something which uses SecurityContextHolder under the hood but abstracts away that singleton-like class from my code. I've found no way to do this other than rolling my own interface, like so:
public interface SecurityContextFacade {
SecurityContext getContext();
void setContext(SecurityContext securityContext);
}
Now, my controller (or whatever POJO) would look like this:
public class FooController {
private final SecurityContextFacade securityContextFacade;
public FooController(SecurityContextFacade securityContextFacade) {
this.securityContextFacade = securityContextFacade;
}
public void doSomething(){
SecurityContext context = securityContextFacade.getContext();
// do something w/ context
}
}
And, because of the interface being a point of decoupling, unit testing is straightforward. In this example I use Mockito:
public class FooControllerTest {
private FooController controller;
private SecurityContextFacade mockSecurityContextFacade;
private SecurityContext mockSecurityContext;
#Before
public void setUp() throws Exception {
mockSecurityContextFacade = mock(SecurityContextFacade.class);
mockSecurityContext = mock(SecurityContext.class);
stub(mockSecurityContextFacade.getContext()).toReturn(mockSecurityContext);
controller = new FooController(mockSecurityContextFacade);
}
#Test
public void testDoSomething() {
controller.doSomething();
verify(mockSecurityContextFacade).getContext();
}
}
The default implementation of the interface looks like this:
public class SecurityContextHolderFacade implements SecurityContextFacade {
public SecurityContext getContext() {
return SecurityContextHolder.getContext();
}
public void setContext(SecurityContext securityContext) {
SecurityContextHolder.setContext(securityContext);
}
}
And, finally, the production Spring config looks like this:
<bean id="myController" class="com.foo.FooController">
...
<constructor-arg index="1">
<bean class="com.foo.SecurityContextHolderFacade">
</constructor-arg>
</bean>
It seems more than a little silly that Spring, a dependency injection container of all things, has not supplied a way to inject something similar. I understand SecurityContextHolder was inherited from acegi, but still. The thing is, they're so close - if only SecurityContextHolder had a getter to get the underlying SecurityContextHolderStrategy instance (which is an interface), you could inject that. In fact, I even opened a Jira issue to that effect.
One last thing - I've just substantially changed the answer I had here before. Check the history if you're curious but, as a coworker pointed out to me, my previous answer would not work in a multi-threaded environment. The underlying SecurityContextHolderStrategy used by SecurityContextHolder is, by default, an instance of ThreadLocalSecurityContextHolderStrategy, which stores SecurityContexts in a ThreadLocal. Therefore, it is not necessarily a good idea to inject the SecurityContext directly into a bean at initialization time - it may need to be retrieved from the ThreadLocal each time, in a multi-threaded environment, so the correct one is retrieved.
I agree that having to query the SecurityContext for the current user stinks, it seems a very un-Spring way to handle this problem.
I wrote a static "helper" class to deal with this problem; it's dirty in that it's a global and static method, but I figured this way if we change anything related to Security, at least I only have to change the details in one place:
/**
* Returns the domain User object for the currently logged in user, or null
* if no User is logged in.
*
* #return User object for the currently logged in user, or null if no User
* is logged in.
*/
public static User getCurrentUser() {
Object principal = SecurityContextHolder.getContext().getAuthentication().getPrincipal()
if (principal instanceof MyUserDetails) return ((MyUserDetails) principal).getUser();
// principal object is either null or represents anonymous user -
// neither of which our domain User object can represent - so return null
return null;
}
/**
* Utility method to determine if the current user is logged in /
* authenticated.
* <p>
* Equivalent of calling:
* <p>
* <code>getCurrentUser() != null</code>
*
* #return if user is logged in
*/
public static boolean isLoggedIn() {
return getCurrentUser() != null;
}
To make it just show up in your JSP pages, you can use the Spring Security Tag Lib:
http://static.springsource.org/spring-security/site/docs/3.0.x/reference/taglibs.html
To use any of the tags, you must have the security taglib declared in your JSP:
<%# taglib prefix="security" uri="http://www.springframework.org/security/tags" %>
Then in a jsp page do something like this:
<security:authorize access="isAuthenticated()">
logged in as <security:authentication property="principal.username" />
</security:authorize>
<security:authorize access="! isAuthenticated()">
not logged in
</security:authorize>
NOTE: As mentioned in the comments by #SBerg413, you'll need to add
use-expressions="true"
to the "http" tag in the security.xml config for this to work.
If you are using Spring Security ver >= 3.2, you can use the #AuthenticationPrincipal annotation:
#RequestMapping(method = RequestMethod.GET)
public ModelAndView showResults(#AuthenticationPrincipal CustomUser currentUser, HttpServletRequest request) {
String currentUsername = currentUser.getUsername();
// ...
}
Here, CustomUser is a custom object that implements UserDetails that is returned by a custom UserDetailsService.
More information can be found in the #AuthenticationPrincipal chapter of the Spring Security reference docs.
I get authenticated user by
HttpServletRequest.getUserPrincipal();
Example:
import javax.servlet.http.HttpServletRequest;
import org.springframework.beans.factory.annotation.Autowired;
import org.springframework.security.web.authentication.preauth.RequestHeaderAuthenticationFilter;
import org.springframework.stereotype.Controller;
import org.springframework.ui.Model;
import org.springframework.web.bind.annotation.RequestMapping;
import org.springframework.web.bind.annotation.RequestMethod;
import org.springframework.web.servlet.support.RequestContext;
import foo.Form;
#Controller
#RequestMapping(value="/welcome")
public class IndexController {
#RequestMapping(method=RequestMethod.GET)
public String getCreateForm(Model model, HttpServletRequest request) {
if(request.getUserPrincipal() != null) {
String loginName = request.getUserPrincipal().getName();
System.out.println("loginName : " + loginName );
}
model.addAttribute("form", new Form());
return "welcome";
}
}
In Spring 3+ you have have following options.
Option 1 :
#RequestMapping(method = RequestMethod.GET)
public String currentUserNameByPrincipal(Principal principal) {
return principal.getName();
}
Option 2 :
#RequestMapping(method = RequestMethod.GET)
public String currentUserNameByAuthentication(Authentication authentication) {
return authentication.getName();
}
Option 3:
#RequestMapping(method = RequestMethod.GET)
public String currentUserByHTTPRequest(HttpServletRequest request) {
return request.getUserPrincipal().getName();
}
Option 4 : Fancy one : Check this out for more details
public ModelAndView someRequestHandler(#ActiveUser User activeUser) {
...
}
I would just do this:
request.getRemoteUser();
Yes, statics are generally bad - generally, but in this case, the static is the most secure code you can write. Since the security context associates a Principal with the currently running thread, the most secure code would access the static from the thread as directly as possible. Hiding the access behind a wrapper class that is injected provides an attacker with more points to attack. They wouldn't need access to the code (which they would have a hard time changing if the jar was signed), they just need a way to override the configuration, which can be done at runtime or slipping some XML onto the classpath. Even using annotation injection in the signed code would be overridable with external XML. Such XML could inject the running system with a rogue principal. This is probably why Spring is doing something so un-Spring-like in this case.
For the last Spring MVC app I wrote, I didn't inject the SecurityContext holder, but I did have a base controller that I had two utility methods related to this ... isAuthenticated() & getUsername(). Internally they do the static method call you described.
At least then it's only in once place if you need to later refactor.
You could use Spring AOP aproach.
For example if you have some service, that needs to know current principal. You could introduce custom annotation i.e. #Principal , which indicate that this Service should be principal dependent.
public class SomeService {
private String principal;
#Principal
public setPrincipal(String principal){
this.principal=principal;
}
}
Then in your advice, which I think needs to extend MethodBeforeAdvice, check that particular service has #Principal annotation and inject Principal name, or set it to 'ANONYMOUS' instead.
The only problem is that even after authenticating with Spring Security, the user/principal bean doesn't exist in the container, so dependency-injecting it will be difficult. Before we used Spring Security we would create a session-scoped bean that had the current Principal, inject that into an "AuthService" and then inject that Service into most of the other services in the Application. So those Services would simply call authService.getCurrentUser() to get the object. If you have a place in your code where you get a reference to the same Principal in the session, you can simply set it as a property on your session-scoped bean.
The best solution if you are using Spring 3 and need the authenticated principal in your controller is to do something like this:
import org.springframework.security.authentication.UsernamePasswordAuthenticationToken;
import org.springframework.security.core.userdetails.User;
import org.springframework.stereotype.Controller;
import org.springframework.ui.Model;
#Controller
public class KnoteController {
#RequestMapping(method = RequestMethod.GET)
public java.lang.String list(Model uiModel, UsernamePasswordAuthenticationToken authToken) {
if (authToken instanceof UsernamePasswordAuthenticationToken) {
user = (User) authToken.getPrincipal();
}
...
}
Try this
Authentication authentication =
SecurityContextHolder.getContext().getAuthentication();
String userName = authentication.getName();
I am using the #AuthenticationPrincipal annotation in #Controller classes as well as in #ControllerAdvicer annotated ones. Ex.:
#ControllerAdvice
public class ControllerAdvicer
{
private static final Logger LOGGER = LoggerFactory.getLogger(ControllerAdvicer.class);
#ModelAttribute("userActive")
public UserActive currentUser(#AuthenticationPrincipal UserActive currentUser)
{
return currentUser;
}
}
Where UserActive is the class i use for logged users services, and extends from org.springframework.security.core.userdetails.User. Something like:
public class UserActive extends org.springframework.security.core.userdetails.User
{
private final User user;
public UserActive(User user)
{
super(user.getUsername(), user.getPasswordHash(), user.getGrantedAuthorities());
this.user = user;
}
//More functions
}
Really easy.
Define Principal as a dependency in your controller method and spring will inject the current authenticated user in your method at invocation.
I like to share my way of supporting user details on freemarker page.
Everything is very simple and working perfectly!
You just have to place Authentication rerequest on default-target-url (page after form-login)
This is my Controler method for that page:
#RequestMapping(value = "/monitoring", method = RequestMethod.GET)
public ModelAndView getMonitoringPage(Model model, final HttpServletRequest request) {
showRequestLog("monitoring");
Authentication authentication = SecurityContextHolder.getContext().getAuthentication();
String userName = authentication.getName();
//create a new session
HttpSession session = request.getSession(true);
session.setAttribute("username", userName);
return new ModelAndView(catalogPath + "monitoring");
}
And this is my ftl code:
<#security.authorize ifAnyGranted="ROLE_ADMIN, ROLE_USER">
<p style="padding-right: 20px;">Logged in as ${username!"Anonymous" }</p>
</#security.authorize>
And that's it, username will appear on every page after authorisation.

Whats the use of mapping #requestMapping onto an entire class?

This is an extremely basic question about spring MVC i have seen a few examples where the #RequestMapping sits above the class name of a Controller :
#RequestMapping
public class somethingController {
.
.
.
}
I understan the use of RequestMapping when it comes to methods but i haven't been able to understand the use of mapping it onto an entire class. What is it used for?
thanks in advance.
It allows mapping all the methods to a URL, or a URL prefix, or other restrictions. Further restrictions (like POST/GET, or URL suffix, etc.) can then be defined by a RequestMapping annotation on the methods. These method-level restrictions will either complement or override the restrictions placed on the type-level annotation.
The attributes that can be used at class or method or both levels, and how they behave, are specified in the javadoc.
For example:
#RequestMapping(value = "/foo", produces = "test/html")
public class SomeController {
#RequestMapping(method = RequestMethod.GET)
public String method1() {
...
}
#RequestMapping(method = RequestMethod.POST)
public String method1() {
...
}
}
In this example, both methods are mapped on /foo and produce HTML, but the first one is called when the HTTP method is GET, whereas the second one is called when the HTTP method is POST.

Request mapping for CSS

I have controller that should manage all requests on server:
#RequestMapping(value = "/**", produces = {"text/plain", "application/*"})
#Controller
public class HomeController {
...
}
Also I have mapping for resources in xml:
<mvc:resources location="/resources/" mapping="/assets/**"/>
Homecontroller intercept all requests to server (include to /assets/** mapping). But when client requests CCS files server returns 406 error (and Homecontroller method didn't called):
The resource identified by this request is only capable of generating responses with characteristics not acceptable according to the request "accept" headers.
Is there any chance to fix order for Spring resource handler or fix response for CSS files at all so I could manually return it from server?
Thanks!
I just had the same problem. It causes bad mapping configuration. In your case you should use
#RequestMapping(value = "/", produces = {"text/plain", "application/*"})
#Controller
public class HomeController {
...
}
insead of
#RequestMapping(value = "/**", produces = {"text/plain", "application/*"})
#Controller
public class HomeController {
...
}
In my case, problem appears when i wrote
#RequestMapping(name="/method", method=RequestMethod.GET)
public String myMethod(Model model){
...
}
instead of
#RequestMapping(value="/method", method=RequestMethod.GET)
public String myMethod(Model model){
...
}
The problem is the same in all cases - remapping all request to your method/controller so that css (js, or whatever) static files are redirected to your code.

gwt-gwt 3.0 file upload issue with Spring MVC

I'm having a problem getting the file object when I use FormPanel, FileUploadField, and Spring.
Here is what I have:
I added the CommonsMultipartResolver bean to my Spring Context file:
<bean id="multipartResolver" class="org.springframework.web.multipart.commons.CommonsMultipartResolver">
<property name="maxUploadSize" value="100000"/>
</bean>
I have a model class with the regular getters and setters:
pulic class UploadItem{
private String filename;
private CommonsMultipartFile fileData;
....
getters/setters
....
}
My controller class:
#Controller
#RequestMapping("/Foo")
public class ThingController extends BaseController implements ServlerContextAware{
....
#RequestMapping(value = "/bar", method = RequestMethod.POST)
public #ResponseBody
String createFile(UploadItem item, BindingResults results){
String orgFile = item.getFileData().getOriginalFilename();
return orgFile;
}
I'm using UiBinding to create the form fields, but I'm calling the fileupload field and formpanel to add the other methods in code.
I have a submit button that calls:
form.submit();
And my constructor I take care of the other form requirements:
form.setMethod(Method.POST);
form.setEncoding(Encoding.MULTIPART);
form.setAction("http://url.com/foo/bar");
form.addSubmitCompleteHandler(new SubmitCompleteHandler(){
#Override
public void onSubmitComplete(SubmitCompleteEvent event){
String results = event.getResults();
Info.display("Upload Response", results);
}
});
When I run the code I get a nullpointerexecption on item.getFileData().getOriginalFilename();
I don't know what the problem is.
My guess is the form isn't bound to the UploadItem, because you never told Spring to do that. Now, I am hoping that someone knows how to do this. Normally I would use Spring's form tag library and provide a modelAttribute or commandName in the form, but since I (and the ts) use GWT the form is built from GWT components and I can't use Spring form tags.

Spring mvc 3.1 not able to resolve URI templates

I have a controller class configured with a URI template pattern. However when I redirect to this controller from another controller class it is not able to find this handler method.
I see an error in the logs which says "RequestMappingHandlerMapping - Did not find handler method for /path2/2" and then "No mapping found for HTTP request with URI [/path2/2] in DispatcherServlet.
#Controller
#RequestMapping("/path1")
public class Controller1 {
#RequestMapping (method = MethodRequest.POST)
public String postMethod() {
// some logic
return "redirect:/path2/" + 2;
}
}
#Controller
#RequestMapping("/path2/${id}")
public class Controller2 {
#RequestMapping(method=RequestMethod.GET)
public ModelAndView getMethod(#PathVariable("id") long id) {
return new ModelAndView("some jsp");
}
}
If I change the RequestMapping on Controller2 class to just "/path2/" and redirect to that url, the redirection works fine. Can someone please advise?
I have DispatcherServlet configured in my web.xml and an InternalResourceViewResolver in my servlet context file.
Thanks in advance!!
The syntax is
#RequestMapping("/path2/{id}")
not
#RequestMapping("/path2/${id}")

Resources