Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 31 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.
Sign upContent-Disposition added for @ResponseBody methods explicitly mapped to ".html" or other extensions [SPR-13629] #18207
Comments
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Rossen Stoyanchev commented There is some very good feedback under the Boot ticket 4220. While it's reasonable not to whitelist "html" by default (thus exposing controller methods returning String) we can also eliminate the need to explicitly register ".html" for content negotiation purposes. For example if the mapping includes ".html" or has a produces condition we shouldn't need anything further. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Rossen Stoyanchev commented Re-opening and updating the title to a reflect a more general aim to fix this for any extension that's explicitly present in the mapping (not only ".html"). |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Rossen Stoyanchev commented This now works so that any extension explicitly present in a request mapping is okay. Furthermore, specifically for ".html" in the URL we do allow suffix pattern matching if the method explicitly states that it produces "text/html". |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
blop commented Can we disable this behaviour somehow ? |
spring-issuemaster commentedNov 1, 2015
•
edited
Rossen Stoyanchev opened SPR-13629 and commented
The fix to protect against RFD exploits (#18124) introduced a "Content-Disposition:attachment;filename=f.txt" response header for
@ResponseBody
methods where the URL appears to have an extension that is neither whitelisted by default nor explicitly registered by the application.By default ".html" is not whitelisted since a controller method returning String can be rendered as any requested content type (since StringHttpMessageConverter accepts
"*/*"
) and in the case of HTML that can lead to XSS and RFD attacks.However as commented under Spring Boot #4220 we should consider ways to make it straight-forward to render HTML via
@ResponseBody
when that is the actual intent.spring-projects/spring-boot#4220 (comment)
Affects: 3.2.15, 4.1.8, 4.2.2
Issue Links:
@RequestMapping
endpoint ("is duplicated by")Referenced from: commits f2e4da3, 237439e, d500d52, e190f26, 6a9329c, bdb71e9
Backported to: 4.1.9, 3.2.16