Fix DB Query Leak when passing too long Values to Users Endpoint - #4077
Draft
adrianhoelzl-sap wants to merge 6 commits into
Draft
adrianhoelzl-sap wants to merge 6 commits into
adrianhoelzl-sap wants to merge 6 commits into
Conversation
cf-foundation-community-automation
Bot
moved this to Inbox
in Foundational Infrastructure Working Group
fhanik
approved these changes
Sep 18, 2026
github-project-automation
Bot
moved this from Inbox
to Pending Merge | Prioritized
in Foundational Infrastructure Working Group
strehle
requested review from
duanemay and
gdgenchev
and
a lite review from Copilot
September 19, 2026 14:08
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Copilot review overview
🟡 Changes recommended
Database-error sanitization gaps and incomplete validation of persisted fields remain.
Get a fresh assessment by requesting another Copilot review.
Review effort: Lite
Findings: 2
Open (3)
What changed in this PR
Adds SCIM field-length validation and database-error sanitization to prevent oversized user data from reaching database columns.
Changes:
- Validates username, given name, and family name lengths.
- Adds endpoint and unit tests for oversized values.
- Adds database-error handling.
| File | Summary |
|---|---|
uaa/src/test/java/org/cloudfoundry/identity/uaa/scim/endpoints/ScimUserEndpointsMockMvcTests.java |
Adds endpoint regression tests. |
server/src/test/java/org/cloudfoundry/identity/uaa/scim/util/ScimUtilsTest.java |
Tests field-length validation boundaries. |
server/src/main/java/org/cloudfoundry/identity/uaa/scim/util/ScimUtils.java |
Implements field-length validation. |
server/src/main/java/org/cloudfoundry/identity/uaa/scim/endpoints/ScimUserEndpoints.java |
Applies validation and sanitizes database errors. |
💡 Add a code-review agent skill or configure MCP servers for context-aware, tailored reviews. Learn more in the docs.
| // Never leak DB internals (SQL statements, column names, driver messages) to the caller | ||
| // for any DataAccessException not explicitly mapped to a status above. | ||
| if (e.getStatus() == HttpStatus.INTERNAL_SERVER_ERROR && t instanceof DataAccessException) { | ||
| e = new ScimException("A database error occurred.", t, HttpStatus.INTERNAL_SERVER_ERROR); |
Comment on lines
+654
to
660
| // Never leak DB internals (SQL statements, column names, driver messages) to the caller | ||
| // for any DataAccessException not explicitly mapped to a status above. | ||
| if (e.getStatus() == HttpStatus.INTERNAL_SERVER_ERROR && t instanceof DataAccessException) { | ||
| e = new ScimException("A database error occurred.", t, HttpStatus.INTERNAL_SERVER_ERROR); | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } |
Comment on lines
+118
to
+122
| if (user.getGivenName() != null && user.getGivenName().length() > 255) { | ||
| throw new InvalidScimResourceException("Given name must be no more than 255 characters in length."); | ||
| } | ||
| if (user.getFamilyName() != null && user.getFamilyName().length() > 255) { | ||
| throw new InvalidScimResourceException("Family name must be no more than 255 characters in length."); |
gdgenchev
reviewed
Sep 20, 2026
| incrementErrorCounts(e); | ||
| // User can supply trace=true or just trace (unspecified) to get stack | ||
| // traces | ||
| boolean trace = request.getParameter("trace") != null && !"false".equals(request.getParameter("trace")); |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hmm, should we remove this trace option? It does not seem the best idea to expose exception stack trace as API response. Maybe adding a traceId to the response that is also logged server side would be the best of both worlds.
|
|
||
| @ExceptionHandler | ||
| public View handleException(Exception t, HttpServletRequest request) throws ScimException, InternalUserManagementDisabledException { | ||
| logger.error("Unhandled exception in SCIM user endpoints. {}", t.getMessage()); |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is a strange decision - log server side only the exception message, but return to API caller HTTP response with full stack trace. I would prefer the opposite.
Member
|
@adrianhoelzl-sap is it ready for review ? because of draft status |
This branch has not been deployed
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
No description provided.