Usability issues with `Authorization` parsing
Nobody has claimed this yet.
Assessment
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Newbie friendliness
- 35/100
- Issue type
- Feature
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Activity status
- Quiet
- Tech stack
- rust
- Domain
- api, backend-api-design
Research direction
Start with the Header::decode entry point used by headers::Authorization::headers::authorization::Bearer in the three supplied test cases. Define behavior that distinguishes a missing or wrong scheme from a malformed or potentially suitable Authorization header, including the requested support for multiple schemes; done means callers can reliably produce the expected 401 or 400 outcomes.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Description
Version
headers 0.4.1
Platform
Darwin [snip] 25.5.0 Darwin Kernel Version 25.5.0: Mon Apr 27 20:41:06 PDT 2026; root:xnu-12377.121.6~2/RELEASE_ARM64_T6030 arm64
Summary
It's impossible for a caller to differentiate between the cases needed.
Broadly speaking, I think there are 3 different returns from parsing this header:
- The
Authorizationheader is present, well-formed. (And maybe, of a type we support.) We probably want anOk(…)here, and the caller will translate this to either 200 or 401, depending on the validity of the credentials supplied. - The
Authorizationheader is missing altogether. The caller will likely want to return a 401. (Or otherwise treat the request as unauthenticated.) - The
Authorizationheader is present and malformed. The caller will want to return a 400.
Distinguishing between these cases accurately with the library is tough. Err(Invalid) is returned if the header isn't parsable, so we might think that should be translated to 400. But it's also returned in the absence of the header, or if the header is present and well-formed, but we want Bearer but got Basic, or something similar. In that case, it should be a 401. But there is no means for the caller to distinguish these cases.
I've attached a test case; the assert! statements are not authoritative, since there's not really a good way to write the right asserts here.
Code Sample
#[cfg(test)]
mod tests {
use headers::Header;
#[test]
fn test_no_headers() {
let result = headers::Authorization::<headers::authorization::Bearer>::decode(&mut [].into_iter());
println!("result = {:#?}", result);
// This isn't an error per se — the request isn't malformed. We'll want to return a 401.
assert!(result.is_err());
}
#[test]
fn test_multiple() {
let headers = [
http::HeaderValue::from_static("Bearer 123"),
http::HeaderValue::from_static("Basic dXNlcjpwYXNz"),
];
let result = headers::Authorization::<headers::authorization::Bearer>::decode(
&mut headers.iter(),
);
println!("result = {:#?}", result);
// This should be an error: multiple `Authorization` headers are malformed, but this will
// assert.
assert!(result.is_err());
}
#[test]
fn test_wrong() {
let headers = [
http::HeaderValue::from_static("Basic dXNlcjpwYXNz"),
];
let result = headers::Authorization::<headers::authorization::Bearer>::decode(
&mut headers.iter(),
);
println!("result = {:#?}", result);
// This isn't an error per se — the request isn't malformed, but the expected header isn't
// present. We'll want to return 401.
assert!(result.is_err());
}
}
Expected Behavior
A caller can accurately distinguish "wrong auth", "malformed message", and "potentially suitable auth".
Actual Behavior
There's only 1 error value, so that is impossible.
I wonder if -> Result<Option<Authorization>, _> would suffice, but I don't know if that's possible with the trait.
Additional Context
Obviously, the caller can do some pre-parsing … but what's the point of the library? 😉
I would also want a generic implementation of Authorization that can handle multiple/all types, in the case that one might accept Bearer or Basic. Yes, we can make two passes at parsing the header, but we'd repeat all the work of finding the scheme, which is a bit of a bummer.
- Dominant language
- Rust
- Stars
- 200
- Forks
- 107
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
More from hyperium/headers
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 62/100
-
Difficulty 3/5 1-2 days Newbie friendliness 78/100
-
Difficulty 4/5 3-5 days Newbie friendliness 48/100
-
Link support Open
Difficulty 4/5 3-5 days Newbie friendliness 38/100
-
easy
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 50/100
All issues in hyperium/headers
Similar issues
-
bug
Difficulty 1/5 Under an hour Newbie friendliness 85/100
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 75/100
yantrikos/yantrik-os#255 ·
-
bug CLI custom-model
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 75/100
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 70/100
raphamorim/rio#1956 ·
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 75/100
rust-bitcoin/rust-bitcoin#6930 · 1 comment ·