Bug 1005093 - Security context associated with EJB asynchronous invocations can potentially be corrupted over time by the caller thread
Summary: Security context associated with EJB asynchronous invocations can potentially...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: JBoss Enterprise Application Platform 6
Classification: JBoss
Component: EJB, Security
Version: 6.0.1,6.1.0,6.1.1
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ER1
: EAP 6.2.0
Assignee: David M. Lloyd
QA Contact: Jan Martiska
Russell Dickenson
URL:
Whiteboard:
: 1032188 (view as bug list)
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2013-09-06 08:22 UTC by Jaikiran Pai
Modified: 2014-05-27 01:28 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2013-12-15 16:21:03 UTC
Type: Bug
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Jaikiran Pai 2013-09-06 08:22:15 UTC
Consider a servlet "S" which invokes on a asynchronous EJB "A". Let's assume "S" runs with a "foo" run-as role. Now when S invokes on "A", the run-as "foo" role is correctly propagated to the asynchronous EJB invocation. However, when the "S" invocation completes and potentially clears the security context (of any run-as role), the invocation(s) within the asynchronous EJB "A" too lose the corresponding security context role association. This is because the 2 threads (the servlet invocation one and the async EJB invocation one) literally share the same object instance of the SecurityContext.

The expected behaviour is that the original security context (attributes) are copied over to the async invocation and updates to that security context later on in a separate thread shouldn't affect the ongoing async EJB invocation.

Comment 3 Jan Martiska 2013-09-19 12:01:33 UTC
Verified in EAP 6.2.0.ER1.

Comment 9 Dimitris Andreadis 2013-10-24 18:27:01 UTC
Assigning jpai EJB issues to david.lloyd. Please re-assign to Cheng or others as needed.

Comment 10 wfink 2013-11-19 17:38:15 UTC
*** Bug 1032188 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.