You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Given that it is easy to fabricate collisions for String.hashCode() (since JDK's impl allows substring-replacement style attacks very easily), ObjectNode is prone to attacks.
Since JsonParser use has been fixed (Issue-21), it is necessary to simialrly address the issue of use of HashMap with default String hashCode().
The big problem here is the performance: not so much that of cost of calculating hashCode() alone, but lack of caching of that value (JDK aggressively caches hashCode on first access).
We should probably do similar two-part solution here as earlier: make it possible to detect abnormal (super high collision list) cases and error out; but also improve hash code used as much as possible.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
(see [https://github.com/FasterXML/jackson-core/issues/21] for related problem)
Given that it is easy to fabricate collisions for String.hashCode() (since JDK's impl allows substring-replacement style attacks very easily), ObjectNode is prone to attacks.
Since JsonParser use has been fixed (Issue-21), it is necessary to simialrly address the issue of use of HashMap with default String hashCode().
The big problem here is the performance: not so much that of cost of calculating hashCode() alone, but lack of caching of that value (JDK aggressively caches hashCode on first access).
We should probably do similar two-part solution here as earlier: make it possible to detect abnormal (super high collision list) cases and error out; but also improve hash code used as much as possible.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: