Added checking of valid topicFilter format in unsubscribe

This commit is contained in:
andrea
2015-08-10 23:07:47 +02:00
parent 74aaf603e2
commit bafcca4c58
5 changed files with 36 additions and 13 deletions
+1
View File
@@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ Version 0.8:
Fixed bug, doesn't close the channel when connect doesn't contains a valid proto name, issue #65
Fixed bug, does not check for zero length topic (filters) in PUBLISH, SUBSCRIBE, and UNSUBSCRIBE, issue #67
Fixed issue #69
Fixed bug #68, UNSUBSCRIBE has to fail on bad topicFilter names
Version 0.7:
Fix issue #38, added aligned to MQTT 3.1.1
@@ -19,6 +19,7 @@ import com.lmax.disruptor.EventHandler;
import com.lmax.disruptor.RingBuffer;
import com.lmax.disruptor.dsl.Disruptor;
import java.nio.ByteBuffer;
import java.text.ParseException;
import java.util.*;
import java.util.concurrent.ExecutorService;
import java.util.concurrent.Executors;
@@ -596,6 +597,14 @@ class ProtocolProcessor implements EventHandler<ValueEvent> {
LOG.debug("UNSUBSCRIBE subscription on topics {} for clientID <{}>", topics, clientID);
for (String topic : topics) {
boolean validTopic = SubscriptionsStore.validate(topic);
if (!validTopic) {
//close the connection, not valid topicFilter is a protocol violation
session.close(true);
LOG.warn("UNSUBSCRIBE found an invalid topic filter <{}> for clientID <{}>", topic, clientID);
return;
}
subscriptions.removeSubscription(topic, clientID);
m_sessionsStore.removeSubscription(topic, clientID);
m_interceptor.notifyTopicUnsubscribed(topic);
@@ -634,7 +643,7 @@ class ProtocolProcessor implements EventHandler<ValueEvent> {
LOG.info("<{}> subscribed to topic <{}> with QoS {}",
newSubscription.getClientId(), topic,
AbstractMessage.QOSType.formatQoS(newSubscription.getRequestedQos()));
boolean validTopic = SubscriptionsStore.validate(newSubscription);
boolean validTopic = SubscriptionsStore.validate(newSubscription.getTopicFilter());
if (!validTopic) {
//send SUBACK with 0x80 for this topic filter
return false;
@@ -33,12 +33,12 @@ public class SubscriptionsStore {
/**
* Check if the topic filter of the subscription is well formed
* */
public static boolean validate(Subscription newSubscription) {
public static boolean validate(String topicFilter) {
try {
parseTopic(newSubscription.topicFilter);
parseTopic(topicFilter);
return true;
} catch (ParseException pex) {
LOG.info("Bad matching topic filter <{}>", newSubscription.topicFilter);
LOG.info("Bad matching topic filter <{}>", topicFilter);
return false;
}
}
@@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ import java.util.concurrent.TimeUnit;
import io.netty.util.AttributeKey;
import org.eclipse.moquette.interception.InterceptHandler;
import org.eclipse.moquette.proto.messages.*;
import org.eclipse.moquette.server.netty.NettyChannel;
import org.eclipse.moquette.spi.IMatchingCondition;
import org.eclipse.moquette.spi.IMessagesStore;
@@ -31,14 +32,8 @@ import org.eclipse.moquette.spi.impl.security.PermitAllAuthorizator;
import org.eclipse.moquette.spi.impl.subscriptions.Subscription;
import org.eclipse.moquette.spi.impl.subscriptions.SubscriptionsStore;
import static org.eclipse.moquette.parser.netty.Utils.VERSION_3_1_1;
import org.eclipse.moquette.proto.messages.AbstractMessage;
import org.eclipse.moquette.proto.messages.AbstractMessage.QOSType;
import org.eclipse.moquette.proto.messages.ConnAckMessage;
import org.eclipse.moquette.proto.messages.ConnectMessage;
import org.eclipse.moquette.proto.messages.DisconnectMessage;
import org.eclipse.moquette.proto.messages.PublishMessage;
import org.eclipse.moquette.proto.messages.SubAckMessage;
import org.eclipse.moquette.proto.messages.SubscribeMessage;
import org.eclipse.moquette.server.ServerChannel;
import static org.junit.Assert.*;
import org.junit.Before;
@@ -505,7 +500,7 @@ public class ProtocolProcessorTest {
@Test
public void testSubscribeWithBadFormattedTopic() {
SubscribeMessage msg = new SubscribeMessage();
msg.addSubscription(new SubscribeMessage.Couple((byte)AbstractMessage.QOSType.MOST_ONE.ordinal(), BAD_FORMATTED_TOPIC));
msg.addSubscription(new SubscribeMessage.Couple((byte) AbstractMessage.QOSType.MOST_ONE.ordinal(), BAD_FORMATTED_TOPIC));
m_session.setAttribute(NettyChannel.ATTR_KEY_CLIENTID, FAKE_CLIENT_ID);
m_session.setAttribute(NettyChannel.ATTR_KEY_CLEANSESSION, false);
subscriptions.clearAllSubscriptions();
@@ -522,6 +517,24 @@ public class ProtocolProcessorTest {
assertEquals(QOSType.FAILURE, qosSubAcked.get(0));
}
/*
* Check topicFilter is a valid MQTT topic filter (issue 68)
* */
@Test
public void testUnsubscribeWithBadFormattedTopic() {
UnsubscribeMessage msg = new UnsubscribeMessage();
msg.setMessageID(1);
msg.addTopicFilter(BAD_FORMATTED_TOPIC);
m_session.setAttribute(NettyChannel.ATTR_KEY_CLIENTID, FAKE_CLIENT_ID);
m_session.setAttribute(NettyChannel.ATTR_KEY_CLEANSESSION, false);
//Exercise
m_processor.processUnsubscribe(m_session, msg);
//Verify
assertTrue(m_session.isClosed());
}
@Test
public void testPublishOfRetainedMessage_afterNewSubscription() throws Exception {
@@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ class UnsubscribeDecoder extends DemuxDecoder {
//check qos level
if (message.getQos() != AbstractMessage.QOSType.LEAST_ONE) {
throw new CorruptedFrameException("Found an Usubscribe message with qos other than LEAST_ONE, was: " + message.getQos());
throw new CorruptedFrameException("Found an Unsubscribe message with qos other than LEAST_ONE, was: " + message.getQos());
}
int start = in.readerIndex();