Buggy forgery protection in Rails 2.1?

Hello,

I’ve just upgraded by app to Rails 2.1 and my log started to be filled
with ActionController::InvalidAuthenticityToken exceptions.

I have an application with external XML Restful access.
It seems each time a request comes from a search engine crawler (that
doesn’t support sessions or cookies), Rails 2.1 raises an error even
if the documentation says:

Only HTML/JavaScript requests are checked, so this will not protect your XML API (presumably you’ll have a different authentication scheme there anyway).

Any suggestion?

Here’s the latest part of the backtrace.

“ActionController::InvalidAuthenticityToken”
/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.1.0/lib/action_controller/
request_forgery_protection.rb:86:in verify_authenticity_token' /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/activesupport-2.1.0/lib/active_support/ callbacks.rb:173:insend’
/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/activesupport-2.1.0/lib/active_support/
callbacks.rb:173:in evaluate_method' /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/activesupport-2.1.0/lib/active_support/ callbacks.rb:161:incall’
/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.1.0/lib/action_controller/
filters.rb:430:in call' /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.1.0/lib/action_controller/ filters.rb:592:inrun_before_filters’
/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.1.0/lib/action_controller/
filters.rb:578:in call_filters' /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.1.0/lib/action_controller/ filters.rb:573:inperform_action_without_benchmark’
/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.1.0/lib/action_controller/
benchmarking.rb:68:in perform_action_without_rescue' /usr/lib/ruby/1.8/benchmark.rb:293:inmeasure’
/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.1.0/lib/action_controller/
benchmarking.rb:68:in perform_action_without_rescue' /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.1.0/lib/action_controller/ rescue.rb:201:inperform_action_without_caching’
/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.1.0/lib/action_controller/
caching/sql_cache.rb:13:in perform_action' /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/activerecord-2.1.0/lib/active_record/ connection_adapters/abstract/query_cache.rb:33:incache’
/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/activerecord-2.1.0/lib/active_record/
query_cache.rb:8:in cache' /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.1.0/lib/action_controller/ caching/sql_cache.rb:12:inperform_action’
/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.1.0/lib/action_controller/
base.rb:529:in send' /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.1.0/lib/action_controller/ base.rb:529:inprocess_without_filters’
/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.1.0/lib/action_controller/
filters.rb:569:in process_without_session_management_support' /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.1.0/lib/action_controller/ session_management.rb:130:inprocess’
/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.1.0/lib/action_controller/
base.rb:389:in process' /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.1.0/lib/action_controller/ dispatcher.rb:149:inhandle_request’
/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.1.0/lib/action_controller/
dispatcher.rb:107:in dispatch' /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.1.0/lib/action_controller/ dispatcher.rb:104:insynchronize’
/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.1.0/lib/action_controller/
dispatcher.rb:104:in dispatch' /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.1.0/lib/action_controller/ dispatcher.rb:120:indispatch_cgi’
/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.1.0/lib/action_controller/
dispatcher.rb:35:in `dispatch’

On 11 Jun 2008, at 15:03, Simone C. wrote:

Only HTML/JavaScript requests are checked, so this will not protect
your XML API (presumably you’ll have a different authentication
scheme there anyway).

Any suggestion?

I do know that it changed from looking at the accept header to the
content type header
(Change the request forgery protection to go by Content-Type instead o… · rails/rails@0697d17 · GitHub
)

Fred

You’re right!

I’ve just discovered two additional interesting discussions about this
topic.

http://www.manning-sandbox.com/thread.jspa?threadID=24847&tstart=0
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg01985.html

I think this change is going to break many existing API client using
www-form-encoded Content-Type!

Thanks,
Simone

On Jun 11, 4:09 pm, Frederick C. [email protected]