/*
* Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one or more
* contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file distributed with
* this work for additional information regarding copyright ownership.
* The ASF licenses this file to You under the Apache License, Version 2.0
* (the "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance with
* the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at
*
* http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
*
* Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
* distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
* WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
* See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
* limitations under the License.
*/
package org.apache.tomcat.util.http;
import java.util.Locale;
import org.apache.tomcat.util.res.StringManager;
public enum CookiesWithoutEquals {
IGNORE("ignore"),
NAME("name");
/*
* @formatter:off
* There is no VALUE option since the Servlet specification does not permit the creation of a Cookie with a name
* that is either null or the zero length string.
*
* In RFC 2019, cookie name and value were defined as follows:
* cookie = NAME "=" VALUE *(";" cookie-av)
* NAME = attr
* VALUE = value
* attr = token
* value = word
* And from RFC 2068
* token = 1*<any CHAR except CTLs or tspecials>
* word = *TEXT
* Set-Cookie and Cookie used the same definition.
* Name had to be at least one character, equals sign was required, value could be the empty string.
*
* In RFC 2965, the definition of value changed to:
* value = token | quoted-string
* Set-Cookie2 and Cookie use the same definition.
* Name had to be at least one character, equals sign was required, value could not be the empty string (it could
* be "").
*
* In RFC6265, which aimed to document actual usage, cookie name and value are defined as follows:
* cookie-pair = cookie-name "=" cookie-value
* cookie-name = token
* cookie-value = *cookie-octet / ( DQUOTE *cookie-octet DQUOTE )
* For the user agent, the equals sign was required and cookies with no name were ignored.
*
* In RFC6265bis, the definitions are unchanged.
* For the user agent:
* - a name-value-pair without an equals sign is treated as the value of a cookie with an empty name.
* - both empty name and empty value are allowed but if both are empty the cookie will be ignored.
* @formatter:on
*
* To see how RFC6265 arrived at his behaviour, see https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/issues/159
*
* Historically, the users agents settled on using a name-value-pair without an equals sign to indicate a cookie
* with a value but no name. Tomcat did the opposite. That arose from addressing this bug:
* https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49000 which was based on observed but not understood client
* behaviour.
*
* The current RFC6265bis text explicitly treats a name-value-pair without an equals sign as a cookie with a value
* but no name. There are currently no plans for the Servlet specification to support nameless cookies.
*/
private static final StringManager sm = StringManager.getManager(CookiesWithoutEquals.class);
private final String value;
CookiesWithoutEquals(String value) {
this.value = value;
}
public String getValue() {
return value;
}
public static CookiesWithoutEquals fromString(String from) {
String trimmedLower = from.trim().toLowerCase(Locale.ENGLISH);
for (CookiesWithoutEquals value : values()) {
if (value.getValue().equals(trimmedLower)) {
return value;
}
}
throw new IllegalStateException(sm.getString("cookiesWithoutEquals.invalid", from));
}
}