我得到认证的用户 HttpServletRequest.getUserPrincipal ();

例子:

import javax.servlet.http.HttpServletRequest;

import org.springframework.beans.factory.annotation.Autowired;
import org.springframework.security.web.authentication.preauth.RequestHeaderAuthenticationFilter;
import org.springframework.stereotype.Controller;
import org.springframework.ui.Model;
import org.springframework.web.bind.annotation.RequestMapping;
import org.springframework.web.bind.annotation.RequestMethod;
import org.springframework.web.servlet.support.RequestContext;

import foo.Form;

@Controller
@RequestMapping(value="/welcome")
public class IndexController {

    @RequestMapping(method=RequestMethod.GET)
    public String getCreateForm(Model model, HttpServletRequest request) {

        if(request.getUserPrincipal() != null) {
            String loginName = request.getUserPrincipal().getName();
            System.out.println("loginName : " + loginName );
        }

        model.addAttribute("form", new Form());
        return "welcome";
    }
}

The only problem is that even after authenticating with Spring Security, the user/principal bean doesn't exist in the container, so dependency-injecting it will be difficult. Before we used Spring Security we would create a session-scoped bean that had the current Principal, inject that into an "AuthService" and then inject that Service into most of the other services in the Application. So those Services would simply call authService.getCurrentUser() to get the object. If you have a place in your code where you get a reference to the same Principal in the session, you can simply set it as a property on your session-scoped bean.

Yes, statics are generally bad - generally, but in this case, the static is the most secure code you can write. Since the security context associates a Principal with the currently running thread, the most secure code would access the static from the thread as directly as possible. Hiding the access behind a wrapper class that is injected provides an attacker with more points to attack. They wouldn't need access to the code (which they would have a hard time changing if the jar was signed), they just need a way to override the configuration, which can be done at runtime or slipping some XML onto the classpath. Even using annotation injection in the signed code would be overridable with external XML. Such XML could inject the running system with a rogue principal. This is probably why Spring is doing something so un-Spring-like in this case.

您可以使用Spring AOP方法。 例如，如果你有一些服务，它需要知道当前的本金。您可以引入自定义注释，例如@Principal，它表明该服务应该是依赖于主体的。

public class SomeService {
    private String principal;
    @Principal
    public setPrincipal(String principal){
        this.principal=principal;
    }
}

然后在您的通知中，我认为需要扩展MethodBeforeAdvice，检查特定的服务有@Principal注释并注入Principal名称，或者将其设置为'ANONYMOUS'。

我同意必须为当前用户查询SecurityContext很糟糕，这似乎是一种非常非spring的处理这个问题的方式。

我写了一个静态的“助手”类来处理这个问题;它是脏的，因为它是一个全局和静态的方法，但我认为如果我们改变任何与安全相关的东西，至少我只需要改变一个地方的细节:

/**
* Returns the domain User object for the currently logged in user, or null
* if no User is logged in.
* 
* @return User object for the currently logged in user, or null if no User
*         is logged in.
*/
public static User getCurrentUser() {

    Object principal = SecurityContextHolder.getContext().getAuthentication().getPrincipal()

    if (principal instanceof MyUserDetails) return ((MyUserDetails) principal).getUser();

    // principal object is either null or represents anonymous user -
    // neither of which our domain User object can represent - so return null
    return null;
}


/**
 * Utility method to determine if the current user is logged in /
 * authenticated.
 * <p>
 * Equivalent of calling:
 * <p>
 * <code>getCurrentUser() != null</code>
 * 
 * @return if user is logged in
 */
public static boolean isLoggedIn() {
    return getCurrentUser() != null;
}

对于我写的上一个Spring MVC应用程序，我没有注入SecurityContext holder，但我确实有一个基本控制器，我有两个实用程序方法与此相关…isAuthenticated() & getUsername()。在内部，它们执行您所描述的静态方法调用。

至少在以后需要重构时，它只在一个地方。