Django 1.2.5 へようこそ！
This is the fifth "bugfix" release in the Django 1.2 series, improving the stability and performance of the Django 1.2 codebase.
With four exceptions, Django 1.2.5 maintains backwards compatibility with Django 1.2.4. It also contains a number of fixes and other improvements. Django 1.2.5 is a recommended upgrade for any development or deployment currently using or targeting Django 1.2.
For full details on the new features, backwards incompatibilities, and deprecated features in the 1.2 branch, see the Django 1.2 リリースノート.
Django includes a CSRF-protection mechanism, which makes use of a token inserted into outgoing forms. Middleware then checks for the token's presence on form submission, and validates it.
Prior to Django 1.2.5, our CSRF protection made an exception for AJAX requests, on the following basis:
Therefore, for ease of use, we did not apply CSRF checks to requests that appeared to be AJAX on the basis of the X-Requested-With header. The Ruby on Rails web framework had a similar exemption.
Recently, engineers at Google made members of the Ruby on Rails development team aware of a combination of browser plugins and redirects which can allow an attacker to provide custom HTTP headers on a request to any website. This can allow a forged request to appear to be an AJAX request, thereby defeating CSRF protection which trusts the same-origin nature of AJAX requests.
Michael Koziarski of the Rails team brought this to our attention, and we were able to produce a proof-of-concept demonstrating the same vulnerability in Django's CSRF handling.
To remedy this, Django will now apply full CSRF validation to all requests, regardless of apparent AJAX origin. This is technically backwards-incompatible, but the security risks have been judged to outweigh the compatibility concerns in this case.
Please see the CSRF docs for example jQuery code that demonstrates this technique, ensuring that you are looking at the documentation for your version of Django, as the exact code necessary is different for some older versions of Django.
In earlier Django versions, when a model instance containing a
FileField was deleted,
FileField took it upon itself to also delete the
file from the backend storage. This opened the door to several potentially
serious data-loss scenarios, including rolled-back transactions and fields on
different models referencing the same file. In Django 1.2.5,
FileField will never delete files from the backend
storage. If you need cleanup of orphaned files, you'll need to handle it
yourself (for instance, with a custom management command that can be run
manually or scheduled to run periodically via e.g. cron).
Django provides a custom SQL hooks as a way to inject hand-crafted SQL
into the database synchronization process. One of the possible uses
for this custom SQL is to insert data into your database. If your
custom SQL contains
INSERT statements, those insertions will be
performed every time your database is synchronized. This includes the
synchronization of any test databases that are created when you run a
However, in the process of testing the Django 1.3, it was discovered that this feature has never completely worked as advertised. When using database backends that don't support transactions, or when using a TransactionTestCase, data that has been inserted using custom SQL will not be visible during the testing process.
Unfortunately, there was no way to rectify this problem without introducing a backwards incompatibility. Rather than leave SQL-inserted initial data in an uncertain state, Django now enforces the policy that data inserted by custom SQL will not be visible during testing.
This change only affects the testing process. You can still use custom
SQL to load data into your production database as part of the
process. If you require data to exist during test conditions, you
should either insert it using test fixtures, or using the
setUp() method of your
Django 1.2.4 introduced a method
ModelAdmin, to cope
with a security issue (changeset ). Although this method was never
documented, it seems some people have overridden
to cope with regressions introduced by that changeset. While the method is
still undocumented and not marked as stable, it may be helpful to know that the
signature of this function has changed.