Apache CXF user input sanitation - soap

I am developing some Apache CFX Web Services (note: I am not using Spring) and I am concern about injections and security in general. I think I am safe when it comes to SQLi once the code reaches my database, but how can I sanitise the input that comes from SOAP?
(ie. How can I prevent any other type of injection? Is there a way to read the raw number of bytes the user has sent? Becuse when objects are sent it is very unflexible to go one by one manually checking the size of each attribute)
Ideally I am looking for a library that supports the sanitisation of user input from SOAP.

Related

Query message store of mirth connect

Can I use mirth connect to store millions of HL7v2 messages (pipe delimited) and query them programmatically by our third party software application at a later point of time?
What's the best way to do that? Is mirth's REST API capable to query its message store efficently?
Unfortunatly I need a running mirth connect instance to browse the REST API documentation according to the manual at page 368. (If it wouldn't require to have a running instance of mirth to browse the documentation of the REST API I wouldn't have asked that question. Is there a mirth connect instance available on the internet to play with? Or would somebody be so kind to post the relevant REST API documentation for that question?)
So far, those are the scenarios I came up yet:
Mirth is integration engine, and its strength is processing messages. Browsing historical messages can be at times difficult or slow, depending on the storage settings for the channel and whether or not you take care to pull additional information out during processing to store in "custom metadata" fields. The custom metadata fields are not indexed by default, but you can add your own (mirth supports several back-end databases, including postgres, mysql, oracle, and mssql.) Searching the message content basically involves doing a full-text search and scanning. Filter options to reduce scan time, apart from the custom metadata you create, are mostly related to the message properties (datetime received, status, etc..) and not the content.
So, I would not recommend it for the use-case you are suggesting.
However, Mirth could definitely be used to convert your messages (batched from files or live) to xml which could be put in a database designed to handle and query large volumes of xml documents. I assume when you say HL7 you mean the ER7 (pipe delimited) format of HL7v2. Mirth automatically does the conversion to xml for those types of messages as they are handled as xml during processing. You could easily create a new parent node that holds both the converted xml and the original message string as children.
If the database you choose has a JDBC driver, Java SDK, or HTTP/REST API, mirth can likely directly insert the converted messages for you as it processes them.
There are two misconceptions here:
HL7v2 message is triggered by the real-world event, called the trigger event, on the placer (sender) side. It expects some activity to happen on the filler (receiver) side by either confirming the message, replying with the query response, etc. I.e., HL7v2 supports data flow among systems.
Mirth Connect is HL7 interface engine aimed at transforming incoming feeds in one format (e.g., HL7v2 in ER7 format) into outgoing feeds in another format (which could be another HL7v2, or XML, or database, etc.). It does not store anything except a configured portion of messages for audit purposes.
Now, to implement a solution you outlined, Mirth Connect or any other transformation mechanism has to implement two flows: receive, convert if needed and store incoming messages; provide an interface to query those messages.
This is obviously can be done with Mirth Connect but your initial question if Mirth is capable in storing millions of records is incorrect. In fact it's recommended to keep as less messages as possible to speed up Mirth processing (each processed message is stored in the Mirth internal database several times depending on configuration). Thus, all transformed messages are going into the external public or private message storage exactly as shown on your diagrams.

JavaFX interactivity with Spring MVC Restful

I am building a JavaFX client application communicating with Spring MVC Restful server(Spring boot 1.4.1) application which works as expected.
Some features require fast interaction with the server to validate limits and availability before proceeding to next input example check if member number insert is valid and if has exceeded limit to insert, during accumulation of records(each confirmed record temporarily stored in a tableview before sent to server for storage) before the records are actually saved.
Within JavaFX and Spring framework(in both frontend and backend) scope, how can such kind of features made look more interactive(or live) than normal "let-me-wait-for-response" approach
If question is not clear, just ask, otherwise i think it is
It appears that the only interaction you have between client (JavaFX) and server (SpringBoot) is through a REST API. This will make short bursts of data (such a validation) take longer.
Switching to another communication mechanism (for example gRPC or Netty with Msgpack) could help. Note that once you open the door for non-REST calls it'll make you re-think the use of REST in the first place.
Non-REST communication may not be an option depending on your requirements (firewalls, etc) or may need additional setup in order to surmount other obstacles, in other words, there's no free lunch.

What's the best practice to collect data from different clients?

Here are the details of my use case:
What's my data..
There would be user experiences, error report, state info and so on. The data is fragmented and may change in the future. So I plan to use NoSQL, maybe mongodb, to save data in the server.
What are the clients..
They are clients written in different languages, like C#, C++, LabVIEW and so on. Some don't even have an access to a mongodb driver, so of course it's not an option to communicate with database directly. And framework like below is needed.
Clients -> (Some protocol) -> Broker -> Database.
As those clients are not web client, so common web server using http may not suit for my case, right? Is there any suggestion for the protocol, broker and database, Or even a new framework.
My goal is to make the clients can send data as convenient as possible.
Thank you!
This is not really new, but a message driven application, which is a well understood pattern.
I did this mostly in Java, so I will stick to this language here.
A broker alone would be not enough here. Let us say you use Apache ActiveMQ as you message broker, you would still need to get your data into the database, since MQ is... ...a message queue. So you need a part which gets the messages out of MQ, processes them according to your business rules and stores them in the (correct) database instance, and the correct collection/bucket/table. Of course you could write this part by hand, but that would be pretty much reinventing the wheel. There is a notion of a "message routing and mediation engine", and the most commonly suggested here is Apache Camel, which has quite some components to communicate with databases and other so called consumers and producers. And that is the key point. In general, if possible, your clients should send their data to the message broker directly. But, if they can't, they can simply send text files or make REST calls – there are actually too many options to list here. This incoming data can be preprocessed and normalized to your standard format by a "route" in Apache Camel (a set of a consumer, conversion rules and a producer, in it's simplest form) and send as an AMQP message to MQ. From there, another Camel route can process the AMQP messages, apply your business rules and store the data in the database... ...or whatever else may come to your mind (for example sending an email).
So this solution supports a multitude of protocols for incoming and outgoing messages (as long as they are supported by Camel) and you have your business rules in a centralized and well defined location.
To implement this, I'd strongly suggest using Apache ServiceMix, which is a distribution of ActiveMQ, Camel and a system to manage the components and business rules.
Finally, web server with http protocal could suit for the use case, I think.
Mostly I want is a universal API for different kinds of clients to save data to cloud. Http has method GET, POST, PUT, DELETE, so with a RESTful API it is naturlly suitable for operate data, I think.
My solution at last is Node.js(Express) + Mongodb (a quite common group), and a RESTful API is provided via Express web server, clients can use http to operate data conviencely. Also, it is quite light weight and easy to get started.
Here is some tutorial: http://cwbuecheler.com/web/tutorials/2013/node-express-mongo/

GWT RPC -- Effect of sending very large binary data?

Assuming a standard Jetty servlet container, what is the effect (On the server, or the client) of sending a large set of binary (string) data over RPC?
Specifically, since it does not seem that GWT RPC has support for streaming, I am concerned that two things might happen:
Large memory consumption on the server side since the binary data is being loaded into memory of the RPC class.
Slow serialization or de-serialization.
Assuming any of these are true, what are my options? I am trying to build a uniform API so I'd rather not have to tell the developer: "Oh in this case, manually create a REST request to get the data".
If you need to transfer a really big amount of binary data, GWT-RPC is a bad choice (all the problem you've listed are correct ones). But if you want a uniform API on the client side, without telling the developer to simply use raw HTTP to get data, you'll have to provide client implementation for your binary service.

is it possible to write record as NO-UNDO in transaction?

we are making some loging issue, where we need write the logentries in the DB. But the process run in a transaction and by rollback are our new logentries also deleted. can I make a write in DB out of the transaction? something like write in temptable with NO-UNDO option...? that the new logentries still remain in DB...?
Another possibility would be to use an app server. Transactions on app server sessions are independent from transactions in the original session (that's what the optional and redundant "DISTINCT TRANSACTION" syntax is all about).
Another option would be to use a simple messaging system. One very easy to setup and use option is STOMP. It is platform neutral and very easy to get going with.
Julian Lyndon-Smith posted the following on PEG about a month ago, and it really is as easy to setup and use as he says (I've tried it, I used ApacheMQ which is also very easy to setup and use):
Following on from presentations in Boston and Finland, dot.r is
pleased to announce the open source Stomp project, available
immediately.
Download from either http://www.dotr.com or
https://bitbucket.org/jmls/stomp , the dot.r stomp programs allow you
to connect your progress session to any other application or service
that is connected to the same message broker.
Open source, free message brokers that support Stomp are:
Fuse
(http://fusesource.com/products/fuse-mq-enterprise/) [a Progress company now owned by Red Hat inc]
Fuse MQ Enterprise is a standards-based, open source messaging platform that deploys with a very small footprint. The lack of license
fees combined with high-performance, reliable messaging that can be
used with any development environment provides a solution that
supports integration everywhere
ActiveMQ
Apache ActiveMQ (tm) (http://activemq.apache.org/)is the most popular
and powerful open source messaging and Integration Patterns server. Apache
ActiveMQ is fast, supports many Cross Language Clients and Protocols, comes
with easy to use Enterprise Integration Patterns and many advanced features
while fully supporting JMS 1.1 and J2EE 1.4.
Apache ActiveMQ is released under the Apache 2.0 License.
RabbitMQ
RabbitMQ is a message broker. The principal idea is pretty simple: it
accepts and forwards messages. You can think about it as a post
office: when you send mail to the post box you're pretty sure that Mr.
Postman will eventually deliver the mail to your recipient. Using this
metaphor RabbitMQ is a post box, a post office and a postman.
The major difference between RabbitMQ and the post office is the fact
that it doesn't deal with paper, instead it accepts, stores and
forwards binary blobs of data - messages.
Please feel free to log any issues on the
https://bitbucket.org/jmls/stomp issue system, and fork the project in
order to commit back all those new features that you are going to add
...
dot.r Stomp uses the permissive MIT licence
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIT_License)
Have fun, enjoy !
Julian
Every change to the database must be part of a transaction. If you do not explicitly start one it will be implicitly started for you and scoped to the next outer block with transaction capabilities.
However and although I would not recommend you to, work with sub-transactions. You can invoke a sub transaction by explicitly specifying a DO TRANSACTION within the transaction scope. Although the database will never know about it, the client can roll back the sub transaction while the database can commit the transaction.
But in order to implement something like this you must master the concepts of transaction scope, block behavior and error handling.
RealHeavyDude.
Write your log entries to a no-undo temp-table.
When the code will commit a transaction, or transactions aren't active (transactionID = ?) have your code write the log entries out.
I don't think there is any way to do this in ABL as you planned either efficiently (sprinkling temp-table flushes or other tidbits all over the place is gross) or reliably (what if the application crashes with an un-flushed temp-table?), as others have mentioned. I would suggest making your complicated logging less coupled to your app by making the database writes asynchronous, occurring outside of your application if possible.
Since you're on Windows, you could change your logging to use the .NET log4net library instead of ABL constructs. log4net has a few appenders that would be useful:
AdoNetAppender which lets you log directly to a database
RemoteSyslogAppender which uses the syslog protocol, letting you log to an external Unix syslog or rsyslog daemon (rsyslog supports writing log messages to databases)
UDPAppender which sends the log messages via UDP packets somewhere else to be handled (e.g. a logFaces server, which supports writing to databases)
If you must do it in ABL then you could use a named output stream specifically for your log messages (OUTPUT TO STREAM) which writes to a specific location where an external process is listening to handle it. This file could be a pipe created by something like mkfifo or just a regular text file that is monitored for changes with inotify (not sure what the Windows equivalents of these are). This external process would handle parsing the messages and writing them to the database (basically re-inventing rsyslog).
I like the no-undo temp-table idea, just be sure to put the database write part in a "FINALLY" block in case of unhandled exceptions.