From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DDF357AE5B for ; Wed, 6 Jul 2022 18:09:10 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id D43D5D915 for ; Wed, 6 Jul 2022 18:09:10 +0200 (CEST) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com [94.136.29.106]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS for ; Wed, 6 Jul 2022 18:09:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 41A1143C5F for ; Wed, 6 Jul 2022 18:09:09 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2022 18:09:07 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.11.0 Content-Language: en-US To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com References: <20220513134900.440420-1-m.heiserer@proxmox.com> <20220513134900.440420-2-m.heiserer@proxmox.com> From: Daniel Tschlatscher In-Reply-To: <20220513134900.440420-2-m.heiserer@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.102 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment NICE_REPLY_A -0.001 Looks like a legit reply (A) SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE -0.01 - Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH v2 http-server 2/2] AnyEvent: Fix #3990 - make small files uploadable X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2022 16:09:10 -0000 The GUI works without problems. Files of arbitrary size can be uploaded without issues. Apart from that, I mostly focused on usage via the API using curl and Postman. What worked as expected: * Upload in the GUI Tested by uploading files of sizes: 0B, 1kB, 8kB, 15kB (did not work before), 16kB, 32kB, 1MB, 1GB, 10GB * Uploading a 8kB and a 32kB file with and without the corresponding checksums. * Unknown values for the "metadata" in the body (e.g. Content- Disposition, filename, ...) fail expectedly * Unmatching file extensions (extension of the file passed in phase 0 and file extension assigned in the filename) fail expectedly All errors above return HTTP status 501 ("Not implemented") which I think is rather confusing, even if they include a descriptive error message. I'd wager that it would be better to differentiate between malformed multi-form data and internal server errors, and return 400 for incorrect user inputs. This makes it much easier for anyone (that is not a browser) to interface with this part of the API. Below problems seem to originate in file_upload_multipart() or at least reach this part of the code (and could therefore probably improve error status communication for the user here): * Using an unknown value for the "Content-Type" Http-Header or assigning boundary differently to what is used in the body => Connection dies with error "empty reply from server" * Adding an unknown "metadata" field or changing an existing one (e.g. filename to fielname) => results in the same error as above * Malforming the boundary for phase 1 (the second one in the http body) (Seems this is parsed incorrectly?) => 501 wrong field `name` for file upload, expected `filename` - abort upload * Malforming the very last boundary => Connection dies, "empty reply from server". Syslog error: "problem with client [...] Connection timed out" I am not quite sure how much precedence fixing the errors above should have, as even most API users will probably never encounter them. However, I feel like that at the very least the basic error message should be revised to no longer return 501 and to include a more descriptive error message than just "upload failed". With no major problems and depending on how important the (edge-)cases above are, consider this patch Tested-by: Daniel Tschlatscher