[jira] [Resolved] (ACCUMULO-1928) Class loader issues with building auth/auth/perm extensions

["Christopher Tubbs (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>]

     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-1928?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

Christopher Tubbs resolved ACCUMULO-1928.
-----------------------------------------
    Resolution: Cannot Reproduce

I don't think this is still an issue. However, please feel free to open an issue at https://github.com/apache/accumulo/issues if it is.

> Class loader issues with building auth/auth/perm extensions
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: ACCUMULO-1928
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-1928
>             Project: Accumulo
>          Issue Type: Bug
>    Affects Versions: 1.5.0, 1.6.0
>            Reporter: Michael Allen
>            Priority: Major
>
> In the course of building extensions to take advantage of the {{Authenticator}}, {{Authorizor}} and {{PermissionHandler}} interfaces, I ran into several issues with how the extension classes were loaded (and reloaded) using {{AccumuloVFSClassloader}}.  These issues ultimately meant that we had to make the decision to put these extensions into {{$ACCUMULO_HOME/lib}}, rather than {{$ACCUMULO_HOME/lib/ext}}, so that they would not be reloaded and we would not encounter those issues.
> We should figure out how to fix up the classloader such that it makes it possible to put extensions like these into {{$$ACCUMULO_HOME/lib/ext}}, or we should document that it is not recommended to do so.
> So what were the problems?
> 1. In 1.5.0, Authentication tokens from within the extension could not be loaded via the normal creation pathway.  This pathway in {{CredentialHelper}} includes the following line of code:
> {code}
> Object obj = Class.forName(tokenClass).newInstance();
> {code}
> In 1.6 this code has been replaced with a call in {{AuthenticationToken.AuthenticationTokenSerializer.deserialize()}} that uses {{AccumuloVFSClassloader}}, but I wonder if we shouldn't also make a 1.5.X change to at least make it possible to do it there?  Otherwise anyone trying to create an extension for 1.5.X can only use {{PasswordToken}}s
> 2.  Even when you do or don't fix #1, it leads you on to a different, less tractable problem.
> The {{Authenticatior}} etc. classes are loaded by {{SecurityOperation}} singleton, using {{AccumuloVFSClassloader}} and the objects are held within the singleton, which is held statically by the {{SecurityOperation}} class.  That's all well and good, and let's call that {{AccumuloVSFClassloader}} instances that loaded those classes {{CL1}}.
> But now let's say you stick a new version of your JAR file into {{$ACCUMULO_HOME/lib/ext}}.  {{AccumuloVFSClassloader}} happily creates a new classloader (call it {{CL2}}) for you and reloads your classes.  *However*, the objects instantiated by {{SecurityOperation}} still owe their lineage to {{CL1}}.  When a new authentication token comes in and gets loaded by {{CL2}}, its class name might look like a class from {{CL1}}, but when the {{Authenticator}} that came from {{CL1}} tries to cast that {{CL2}}-based object, you get {{ClassCastException}}s and are basically toast at that point.
> One possible fix here would be for {{AccumuloVFSClassloader}} to somehow notify interested parties that classes had reloaded so that they could flush away any old classes if desired.  There'd be some synchronization issues around doing this, to make sure that the security stuff still worked reliably through this process.  You'd have no guarantee, though, that the rest of the code wouldn't be hanging on to {{CL1}}-based object references and not letting go.  Beating those bugs out may require too much coder discipline to be worth the feature.
> Another possible fix is to just say "don't do that for security-related features and put them in {{$ACCUMULO_HOME/lib}}.  That's kind of giving up on being able to reload these at runtime, but maybe that's OK.  Generally speaking, reloading your security assumptions might be something you want to take the tablet server down for.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)