Presently I am using winhttp api in c++ to get data from a server. The server can support various compression formats. So presently I want to use winhttp to get the compressed format (eg gzip) and decompress it. Is it possible to decompress the data using winhttp?
Surely it's possible.
From here:
To set the decoding option, the application calls InternetSetOption
with the handle returned from InternetOpen, InternetConnect, or
HttpOpenRequest. The INTERNET_OPTION_HTTP_DECODING option is specified
in the dwOption parameter, and the lpBuffer parameter points to a
boolean variable set to true. To disable decoding, the application
calls InternetSetOption with the INTERNET_OPTION_HTTP_DECODING option
and the boolean variable set to false.
So http compression is transprent for user code, you just need one call to InternetSetOption and your traffic will be compressed.
Related
I have an API endpoint for uploading large files, streaming then directly to DB. I use ASP.NET Core's IFormFeature to do this, calling IFormFile.OpenReadStream() to get a Stream that I pass to SqlClient for streaming.
I want to enforce a a maximum file size to avoid abuse. I know IFormFile has a Length property, but I assume that is based on Content-Length or similar and can not be trusted (please correct me if I'm wrong, but AFAIK the only way to be 100% sure about the file size is to actually read the data; the client could send an incorrect Content-Length.)
I must therefore ensure that when the stream is read, it does not read more than what is specified in IFormFile.Length (ideally it should throw if it encounters additional bytes). I have not found a way to do this. Is this possible, or is there perhaps a better way to ensure the server doesn't read enormous amounts of data from clients sending incorrect Content-Length headers?
(It should go without saying that this must not entail reading the entire file into memory.)
We have an API endpoint that allows users to upload images; one of its parameters is an IFormFileCollection.
We'd like to validate the file size to make sure that the endpoint isn't being abused so I'm checking the Length property of each IFormFile, but I don't know whether I can trust this property or not, i.e. does this come from the request? Is it considered 'input', much like Content-Length is?
If you have an IFormFileCollection parameter, and you send data using a "form-data" content-type in the request, that parameter will be bound by a whole lot of plumbing that's hard to dig through online, but if you just debug the action method that accepts the IFormFileCollection (or any collection of IFormFile, really)and inspect the collection, you'll see that the uploaded files will already have been saved on your server's disk.
That's because the entire multi-part form request's body has to be read to determine how many files there are, if any, and form parameters, and validate the request body's format while it's reading it.
So yes, by the time your code ends up there, you can trust IFormFile.Length, because it's pointing to a local file that exists and contains that many bytes.
You're too late there to reject the request though, as it's been already entirely read. You better fix rate and size limits lower in the stack, like on the web server or firewall.
Content-Length is compressed number of bytes of data in the body , it is not reliable since it may include extra data ,for example , you are sending multipart request . Just use the IFormFile.length for features like calculation or validation .
I'm trying to implement the file storage ыукмшсу with basic S3 compatible API using akka-http.
I use s3 java sdk to test my service API and got the problem with the putObject(...) method. I can't consume file properly on my akka-http backend. I wrote simple route for the test purposes:
def putFile(bucket: String, file: String) = put{
extractRequestEntity{ ent =>
val finishedWriting = ent.dataBytes.runWith(FileIO.toPath(new File(s"/tmp/${file}").toPath))
onComplete(finishedWriting) { ioResult =>
complete("Finished writing data: " + ioResult)
}
}
}
It saves file, but file is always corrupted. Looking inside the file I found the lines like these:
"20000;chunk-signature=73c6b865ab5899b5b7596b8c11113a8df439489da42ddb5b8d0c861a0472f8a1".
When I try to PUT file with any other rest client it works as fine as expected.
I know S3 uses "Expect: 100-continue" header and may it he causes problems.
I really can't figure out how to deal with that. Any help appreciated.
This isn't exactly corrupted. Your service is not accounting for one of the four¹ ways S3 supports uploads to be sent on the wire, using Content-Encoding: aws-chunked and x-amz-content-sha256: STREAMING-AWS4-HMAC-SHA256-PAYLOAD.
It's a non-standards-based mechanism for streaming an object, and includes chunks that look exactly like this:
string(IntHexBase(chunk-size)) + ";chunk-signature=" + signature + \r\n + chunk-data + \r\n
...where IntHexBase() is pseudocode for a function that formats an integer as a hexadecimal number as a string.
This chunk-based algorithm is similar to, but not compatible with, Transfer-Encoding: chunked, because it embeds checksums in the stream.
Why did they make up a new HTTP transfer encoding? It's potentially useful on the client side because it eliminates the need to either "read your payload twice or buffer [the entire object payload] in memory [concurrently]" -- one or the other of which is otherwise necessary if you are going to calculate the x-amz-content-sha256 hash before the upload begins, as you otherwise must, since it's required for integrity checking.
I am not overly familiar with the internals of the Java SDK, but this type of upload might be triggered by using .withInputStream() or it might be standard behavor for files too, or for files over a certain size.
Your minimum workaround would be to throw an HTTP error if you see x-amz-content-sha256: STREAMING-AWS4-HMAC-SHA256-PAYLOAD in the request headers since you appear not to have implemented this in your API, but this would most likely only serve to prevent storing objects uploaded by this method. The fact that this isn't already what happens automatically suggests that you haven't implemented x-amz-content-sha256 handling at all, so you are not doing the server-side payload integrity checks that you need to be doing.
For full compatibility, you'll need to implement the algorithm supported by S3 and assumed to be available by the SDKs, unless the SDKs specifically support a mechanism for disabling this algorithm -- which seems unlikely, since it serves a useful purpose, particularly (it appears) for streams whose length is known but that aren't seekable.
¹ one of four -- the other three are a standard PUT, a web-based html form POST, and the multipart API that is recommended for large files and mandatory for files larger than 5 GB.
Trying to process large file in AWS Lamba and skipping through the whole file seems a bit wasteful.
Is there a "range read" function that allows to read only predefined byte range from S3 file?
Yes, this is possible. According to S3 documentation of GET Object in the REST API, it supports use of the HTTP Range header.
Range
Downloads the specified range bytes of an object. For more information about the HTTP Range header, go to http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec14.html#sec14.35.
In the example syntax:
GET /ObjectName HTTP/1.1
Host: BucketName.s3.amazonaws.com
Date: date
Authorization: authorization string (see Authenticating Requests (AWS Signature Version 4))
Range:bytes=byte_range
Popular S3 client libraries, such as the AWS SDK for Java provide convenient client-side APIs for specifying the range information.
I need to invoke a remote REST interface handler and submit it a file in request body. Please note that I don't control the server. I cannot change the request to be multipart, the client has to work in accordance to external specification.
So far I managed to make it work like this (omitting headers etc. for brevity):
byte[] data = readFileCompletely ();
client.target (url).request ().post (Entity.entity (data, "file/mimetype"));
This works, but will fail with huge files that don't fit into memory. And since I have no restriction on filesize, this is a concern.
Question: is it somehow possible to use streams or something similar to avoid reading the whole file into memory?
If possible, I'd prefer to avoid implementation-specific extensions. If not, a solution that works with RESTEasy (on Wildfly) is also acceptable.
ReastEasy as well as Jersey support InputStream out of the box so simply use Entity.entity(inputStream, "application/octet-stream"); or whatever Content-Type header you want to set.
You can go low-level and construct the HTTP request using a library such as the plain java.net.URLConnection.
I have not tried it myself but there is example code which reads a local file and writes it to the request stream without loading it into a byte array.
Upload files from Java client to a HTTP server
Of course this solution requires more manual coding but it should work (unless java.net.URLConnection loads the whole file into memory)