Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 40 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.
Sign upbpo-38686: fix HTTP Digest handling in request.py #17045
Conversation
There is a bug triggered when server replies to a request with `WWW-Authenticate: Digest` where `qop="auth,auth-int"` rather than mere `qop="auth"`. Having both `auth` and `auth-int` is legitimate according to the `qop-options` rule in §3.2.1 of [[https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2617.txt|RFC 2617]]: > qop-options = "qop" "=" <"> 1#qop-value <"> > qop-value = "auth" | "auth-int" | token > **qop-options**: [...] If present, it is a quoted string **of one or more** tokens indicating the "quality of protection" values supported by the server. The value `"auth"` indicates authentication; the value `"auth-int"` indicates authentication with integrity protection This is description confirmed by the definition of the [//n//]`#`[//m//]//rule// extended-BNF pattern defined in §2.1 of [[https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2616.txt|RFC 2616]] as 'a comma-separated list of //rule// with at least //n// and at most //m// items'. When this reply is parsed by `get_authorization`, request.py only tests for identity with `'auth'`, failing to recognize it as one of the supported modes the server announced, and claims that `"qop 'auth,auth-int' is not supported"`.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
the-knights-who-say-ni
commented
Nov 4, 2019
Hello, and thanks for your contribution! I'm a bot set up to make sure that the project can legally accept this contribution by verifying everyone involved has signed the PSF contributor agreement (CLA). CLA MissingOur records indicate the following people have not signed the CLA: For legal reasons we need all the people listed to sign the CLA before we can look at your contribution. Please follow the steps outlined in the CPython devguide to rectify this issue. If you have recently signed the CLA, please wait at least one business day You can check yourself to see if the CLA has been received. Thanks again for the contribution, we look forward to reviewing it! |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Thanks for your time @PypeBros, and welcome to CPython! I assume that you've seen the bot's message about the CLA? Also, if the issue will properly link if you add "bpo-" to the start of this PR's title! |
I'm not a This PR should also have a NEWS entry. Just something simple, like: Added support for multiple ``qop`` values in :class:`urllib.request.AbstractDigestAuthHandler`. I think this also needs a test or two, in |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@brandtbucher : thanks for the welcome and for the help. |
Ah, I see there's not many tests for this class at all. I'll leave that for the core reviewer to decide! |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
CC @orsenthil |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Any follow up ? Afaik, in its current state, it makes python clients unable to inter-operate securely with gSOAP clients. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@orsenthil, does the replies above address your concern with the proposed change ? |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
here you are. I haven't repeated the "XXX: implement auth-int", as this is already on line 1154 |
Thank you! |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
anybody understands why https://travis-ci.org/python/cpython/jobs/615649384?utm_medium=notification&utm_source=github_status failed with "Please fix the 1 file(s) with whitespace issues" ? |
Co-Authored-By: Brandt Bucher <brandtbucher@gmail.com>
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
bedevere-bot
commented
Nov 22, 2019
@orsenthil: Please replace |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
miss-islington
commented
Nov 22, 2019
Thanks @PypeBros for the PR, and @orsenthil for merging it |
* fix HTTP Digest handling in request.py There is a bug triggered when server replies to a request with `WWW-Authenticate: Digest` where `qop="auth,auth-int"` rather than mere `qop="auth"`. Having both `auth` and `auth-int` is legitimate according to the `qop-options` rule in §3.2.1 of [[https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2617.txt|RFC 2617]]: > qop-options = "qop" "=" <"> 1GH-qop-value <"> > qop-value = "auth" | "auth-int" | token > **qop-options**: [...] If present, it is a quoted string **of one or more** tokens indicating the "quality of protection" values supported by the server. The value `"auth"` indicates authentication; the value `"auth-int"` indicates authentication with integrity protection This is description confirmed by the definition of the [//n//]`GH-`[//m//]//rule// extended-BNF pattern defined in §2.1 of [[https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2616.txt|RFC 2616]] as 'a comma-separated list of //rule// with at least //n// and at most //m// items'. When this reply is parsed by `get_authorization`, request.py only tests for identity with `'auth'`, failing to recognize it as one of the supported modes the server announced, and claims that `"qop 'auth,auth-int' is not supported"`. *📜 🤖 Added by blurb_it. * bpo-38686 review fix: remember why. * fix trailing space in Lib/urllib/request.py Co-Authored-By: Brandt Bucher <brandtbucher@gmail.com> (cherry picked from commit 14a89c4) Co-authored-by: PypeBros <PypeBros@users.noreply.github.com>
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
bedevere-bot
commented
Nov 22, 2019
GH-17357 is a backport of this pull request to the 3.8 branch. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
bedevere-bot
commented
Nov 22, 2019
GH-17358 is a backport of this pull request to the 3.7 branch. |
* fix HTTP Digest handling in request.py There is a bug triggered when server replies to a request with `WWW-Authenticate: Digest` where `qop="auth,auth-int"` rather than mere `qop="auth"`. Having both `auth` and `auth-int` is legitimate according to the `qop-options` rule in §3.2.1 of [[https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2617.txt|RFC 2617]]: > qop-options = "qop" "=" <"> 1GH-qop-value <"> > qop-value = "auth" | "auth-int" | token > **qop-options**: [...] If present, it is a quoted string **of one or more** tokens indicating the "quality of protection" values supported by the server. The value `"auth"` indicates authentication; the value `"auth-int"` indicates authentication with integrity protection This is description confirmed by the definition of the [//n//]`GH-`[//m//]//rule// extended-BNF pattern defined in §2.1 of [[https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2616.txt|RFC 2616]] as 'a comma-separated list of //rule// with at least //n// and at most //m// items'. When this reply is parsed by `get_authorization`, request.py only tests for identity with `'auth'`, failing to recognize it as one of the supported modes the server announced, and claims that `"qop 'auth,auth-int' is not supported"`. *📜 🤖 Added by blurb_it. * bpo-38686 review fix: remember why. * fix trailing space in Lib/urllib/request.py Co-Authored-By: Brandt Bucher <brandtbucher@gmail.com> (cherry picked from commit 14a89c4) Co-authored-by: PypeBros <PypeBros@users.noreply.github.com>
* fix HTTP Digest handling in request.py There is a bug triggered when server replies to a request with `WWW-Authenticate: Digest` where `qop="auth,auth-int"` rather than mere `qop="auth"`. Having both `auth` and `auth-int` is legitimate according to the `qop-options` rule in §3.2.1 of [[https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2617.txt|RFC 2617]]: > qop-options = "qop" "=" <"> 1GH-qop-value <"> > qop-value = "auth" | "auth-int" | token > **qop-options**: [...] If present, it is a quoted string **of one or more** tokens indicating the "quality of protection" values supported by the server. The value `"auth"` indicates authentication; the value `"auth-int"` indicates authentication with integrity protection This is description confirmed by the definition of the [//n//]`GH-`[//m//]//rule// extended-BNF pattern defined in §2.1 of [[https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2616.txt|RFC 2616]] as 'a comma-separated list of //rule// with at least //n// and at most //m// items'. When this reply is parsed by `get_authorization`, request.py only tests for identity with `'auth'`, failing to recognize it as one of the supported modes the server announced, and claims that `"qop 'auth,auth-int' is not supported"`. *📜 🤖 Added by blurb_it. * bpo-38686 review fix: remember why. * fix trailing space in Lib/urllib/request.py Co-Authored-By: Brandt Bucher <brandtbucher@gmail.com> (cherry picked from commit 14a89c4) Co-authored-by: PypeBros <PypeBros@users.noreply.github.com>
* fix HTTP Digest handling in request.py There is a bug triggered when server replies to a request with `WWW-Authenticate: Digest` where `qop="auth,auth-int"` rather than mere `qop="auth"`. Having both `auth` and `auth-int` is legitimate according to the `qop-options` rule in §3.2.1 of [[https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2617.txt|RFC 2617]]: > qop-options = "qop" "=" <"> 1GH-qop-value <"> > qop-value = "auth" | "auth-int" | token > **qop-options**: [...] If present, it is a quoted string **of one or more** tokens indicating the "quality of protection" values supported by the server. The value `"auth"` indicates authentication; the value `"auth-int"` indicates authentication with integrity protection This is description confirmed by the definition of the [//n//]`GH-`[//m//]//rule// extended-BNF pattern defined in §2.1 of [[https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2616.txt|RFC 2616]] as 'a comma-separated list of //rule// with at least //n// and at most //m// items'. When this reply is parsed by `get_authorization`, request.py only tests for identity with `'auth'`, failing to recognize it as one of the supported modes the server announced, and claims that `"qop 'auth,auth-int' is not supported"`. *📜 🤖 Added by blurb_it. * bpo-38686 review fix: remember why. * fix trailing space in Lib/urllib/request.py Co-Authored-By: Brandt Bucher <brandtbucher@gmail.com> (cherry picked from commit 14a89c4) Co-authored-by: PypeBros <PypeBros@users.noreply.github.com>
* fix HTTP Digest handling in request.py There is a bug triggered when server replies to a request with `WWW-Authenticate: Digest` where `qop="auth,auth-int"` rather than mere `qop="auth"`. Having both `auth` and `auth-int` is legitimate according to the `qop-options` rule in §3.2.1 of [[https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2617.txt|RFC 2617]]: > qop-options = "qop" "=" <"> 1#qop-value <"> > qop-value = "auth" | "auth-int" | token > **qop-options**: [...] If present, it is a quoted string **of one or more** tokens indicating the "quality of protection" values supported by the server. The value `"auth"` indicates authentication; the value `"auth-int"` indicates authentication with integrity protection This is description confirmed by the definition of the [//n//]`#`[//m//]//rule// extended-BNF pattern defined in §2.1 of [[https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2616.txt|RFC 2616]] as 'a comma-separated list of //rule// with at least //n// and at most //m// items'. When this reply is parsed by `get_authorization`, request.py only tests for identity with `'auth'`, failing to recognize it as one of the supported modes the server announced, and claims that `"qop 'auth,auth-int' is not supported"`. *📜 🤖 Added by blurb_it. * bpo-38686 review fix: remember why. * fix trailing space in Lib/urllib/request.py Co-Authored-By: Brandt Bucher <brandtbucher@gmail.com>
PypeBros commentedNov 4, 2019
•
edited by bedevere-bot
There is a bug triggered when server replies to a request with
WWW-Authenticate: Digest
whereqop="auth,auth-int"
rather than mereqop="auth"
. Having bothauth
andauth-int
is legitimate according to theqop-options
rule in §3.2.1 of https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2617.txt:This is description confirmed by the definition of the [n]
#
[m]rule extended-BNF pattern defined in §2.1 of https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2616.txt as 'a comma-separated list of rule with at least n and at most m items'.When this reply is parsed by
get_authorization
, request.py only tests for identity with'auth'
, failing to recognize it as one of the supported modes the server announced, and claims that"qop 'auth,auth-int' is not supported"
.https://bugs.python.org/issue38686