Support for PostObject #222

Merged
lx merged 14 commits from trinity-1686a/garage:post-object into main 2022-02-21 22:02:31 +00:00
Showing only changes of commit 217b214ca9 - Show all commits

View file

@ -1,7 +1,9 @@
use std::collections::HashMap; use std::collections::HashMap;
use std::convert::TryInto; use std::convert::TryInto;
use std::ops::RangeInclusive;
use std::sync::Arc; use std::sync::Arc;
use chrono::{DateTime, Duration, Utc};
use futures::StreamExt; use futures::StreamExt;
use hyper::header::{self, HeaderMap, HeaderName, HeaderValue}; use hyper::header::{self, HeaderMap, HeaderName, HeaderValue};
use hyper::{Body, Request, Response, StatusCode}; use hyper::{Body, Request, Response, StatusCode};
@ -103,7 +105,55 @@ pub async fn handle_post_object(
} }
let decoded_policy = base64::decode(&policy)?; let decoded_policy = base64::decode(&policy)?;
let _decoded_policy: Policy = serde_json::from_slice(&decoded_policy).unwrap(); let decoded_policy: Policy =
serde_json::from_slice(&decoded_policy).ok_or_bad_request("Invalid policy")?;
let expiration: DateTime<Utc> = DateTime::parse_from_rfc3339(&decoded_policy.expiration)
.ok_or_bad_request("Invalid expiration date")?
.into();
if Utc::now() - expiration > Duration::zero() {
trinity-1686a marked this conversation as resolved Outdated
Outdated
Review

This looks like it should rather be an error case: if the application builder put ${filename} in the key field but the browser for some reason didn't include the name of the uploaded file, we probably want to reject the request.

This looks like it should rather be an error case: if the application builder put `${filename}` in the key field but the browser for some reason didn't include the name of the uploaded file, we probably want to reject the request.

that was actually how a previous iteration worked. This behavior was added because it's exactly how AWS behave (not that I can say I agree with that behavior)

that was actually how a previous iteration worked. This behavior was added because it's exactly how AWS behave (not that I can say I agree with that behavior)
Outdated
Review

:/

:/
return Err(Error::BadRequest(
"Expiration date is in the paste".to_string(),
));
}
let conditions = decoded_policy.into_conditions()?;
for (key, value) in params.iter() {
let key = key.as_str();
if key.eq_ignore_ascii_case("content-type") {
for cond in &conditions.content_type {
let ok = match cond {
Operation::Equal(s) => value == s,
Operation::StartsWith(s) => {
value.to_str()?.split(',').all(|v| v.starts_with(s))
}
};
if !ok {
return Err(Error::BadRequest(format!(
"Key '{}' has value not allowed in policy",
key
)));
}
}
} else {
let conds = conditions.params.get(key).ok_or_else(|| {
Error::BadRequest(format!("Key '{}' is not allowed in policy", key))
})?;
for cond in conds {
let ok = match cond {
lx marked this conversation as resolved Outdated
Outdated
Review

I feel like we should add unit tests for the policy decoding logic (not just for into_conditions but end-to-end starting with JSON)

I feel like we should add unit tests for the policy decoding logic (not just for into_conditions but end-to-end starting with JSON)
Outdated
Review

I'll write a test and post it in the comments of the PR so that you can copy and paste

I'll write a test and post it in the comments of the PR so that you can copy and paste
Operation::Equal(s) => s == value,
Operation::StartsWith(s) => value.to_str()?.starts_with(s),
};
if !ok {
return Err(Error::BadRequest(format!(
"Key '{}' has value not allowed in policy",
key
)));
}
}
}
}
// TODO validate policy against request // TODO validate policy against request
// unsafe to merge until implemented // unsafe to merge until implemented
@ -169,15 +219,74 @@ pub async fn handle_post_object(
)) ))
lx marked this conversation as resolved Outdated
Outdated
Review

This definitely looks like it should have been done before the policy check

This definitely looks like it should have been done before the policy check

turns out AWS ignore this, and only consider content type set in what I called param, not in the field metadata

turns out AWS ignore this, and only consider content type set in what I called param, not in the field metadata
} }

the actual response should be

<PostResponse>
    <Location>https://bucketname.garage.tld/key</Location>
    <Bucket>bucketname</Bucket>
    <Key>key</Key>
    <ETag>"0123456789abcdef0123456789abcdef"</ETag>
</PostResponse>

with corresponding etag and location http headers (these headers are also here for 200 and 204, but not the body)

When using success_action_redirect, etag is set as usual, and location is set to ${success_action_redirect}?bucket=bucketname&key=key&etag=%220123456789abcdef0123456789abcdef%22

the actual response should be ```xml <PostResponse> <Location>https://bucketname.garage.tld/key</Location> <Bucket>bucketname</Bucket> <Key>key</Key> <ETag>"0123456789abcdef0123456789abcdef"</ETag> </PostResponse> ``` with corresponding `etag` and `location` http headers (these headers are also here for 200 and 204, but not the body) When using `success_action_redirect`, `etag` is set as usual, and location is set to `${success_action_redirect}?bucket=bucketname&key=key&etag=%220123456789abcdef0123456789abcdef%22`
// TODO remove allow(dead_code) when policy is verified
#[allow(dead_code)]
#[derive(Deserialize)] #[derive(Deserialize)]
struct Policy { struct Policy {
expiration: String, expiration: String,
conditions: Vec<PolicyCondition>, conditions: Vec<PolicyCondition>,
} }
impl Policy {
fn into_conditions(self) -> Result<Conditions, Error> {
let mut params = HashMap::<_, Vec<_>>::new();
let mut content_type = Vec::new();
let mut length = (0, u64::MAX);
for condition in self.conditions {
match condition {
PolicyCondition::Equal(map) => {
if map.len() != 1 {
return Err(Error::BadRequest("Invalid policy item".to_owned()));
trinity-1686a marked this conversation as resolved Outdated
Outdated
Review

Looks like we don't need this .status() as we are calling it in all branches below

Looks like we don't need this `.status()` as we are calling it in all branches below
}
let (k, v) = map.into_iter().next().expect("size was verified");
if k.eq_ignore_ascii_case("content-type") {
content_type.push(Operation::Equal(v));
} else {
params.entry(k).or_default().push(Operation::Equal(v));
}
}
PolicyCondition::OtherOp([cond, mut key, value]) => {
if key.remove(0) != '$' {
return Err(Error::BadRequest("Invalid policy item".to_owned()));
}
match cond.as_str() {
"eq" => {
if key.eq_ignore_ascii_case("content-type") {
content_type.push(Operation::Equal(value));
} else {
params.entry(key).or_default().push(Operation::Equal(value));
}
}
"starts-with" => {
if key.eq_ignore_ascii_case("content-type") {
content_type.push(Operation::StartsWith(value));
} else {
params
.entry(key)
.or_default()
.push(Operation::StartsWith(value));
}
}
_ => return Err(Error::BadRequest("Invalid policy item".to_owned())),
}
}
PolicyCondition::SizeRange(key, min, max) => {
if key == "content-length-range" {
length.0 = length.0.max(min);
length.1 = length.1.min(max);
} else {
return Err(Error::BadRequest("Invalid policy item".to_owned()));
}
}
}
}
Ok(Conditions {
params,
content_type,
content_length: RangeInclusive::new(length.0, length.1),
})
}
}
/// A single condition from a policy /// A single condition from a policy
#[derive(Deserialize)] #[derive(Deserialize)]
#[serde(untagged)] #[serde(untagged)]
@ -188,11 +297,15 @@ enum PolicyCondition {
SizeRange(String, u64, u64), SizeRange(String, u64, u64),
} }
struct Conditions {
params: HashMap<String, Vec<Operation>>,
content_type: Vec<Operation>,
#[allow(dead_code)] #[allow(dead_code)]
content_length: RangeInclusive<u64>,
}
#[derive(PartialEq, Eq)] #[derive(PartialEq, Eq)]
enum Operation { enum Operation {
Equal, Equal(String),
StartsWith, StartsWith(String),
StartsWithCT,
SizeRange,
} }