December 2006 - jboss-dev-forums - Jboss List Archives

[Design of Security on JBoss] - Re: High-level scoping of Security for JEE5

by scott.stark＠jboss.org

Where is this being done? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3991453#3991453 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3991453

18 years, 1 month

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Security on JBoss] - Re: High-level scoping of Security for JEE5

by anil.saldhana＠jboss.com

I find that the ejb3 layer is creating a set of permissions and adding it to the policy. Is it better to abstract out a layer for creating permissions such that both the ejb21 and the ejb3 deployers can use it. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3991439#3991439 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3991439

18 years, 1 month

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: SEAM / Java 5

by tom.baeyens＠jboss.com

no not yet. let's first wait and see if it actually brings the extra contributions we're hoping for. i think that for 3.2. we need to go ahead and finish with what we have now. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3991438#3991438 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3991438

18 years, 1 month

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Security on JBoss] - Re: SecurityContext

by anil.saldhana＠jboss.com

"scott.stark(a)jboss.org" wrote : This has to be driven by the security aspects and the usecases I outlined. The SecurityAssociation is at best an implementation detail of some aspects. We should be looking to propagate security context info via the invocation payload rather than thread locals. | Yes, that I understood with your previous feedback. That is where the complexity arises with run-as propagation. Apart from RAI, what other trust associaters need to be sent via the payload. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3991436#3991436 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3991436

18 years, 1 month

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Security on JBoss] - Re: Generalizing the JACC service

by anil.saldhana＠jboss.com

doAs requests mainly come from WL and Websphere migration users because there is a facility provided to perform any privileged action once an authenticated subject is obtained. This is Java2 security model and not a JEE mandated requirement. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3991434#3991434 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3991434

18 years, 1 month

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: Other IoC containers support

by scott.stark＠jboss.org

The point of this task should be validating the ability to support mappings of other frameworks onto the mc model. Arbitrary interaction between the mc and some other kernel implementation has too many complications. The main framework I want to see validated is osgi. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3991428#3991428 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3991428

18 years, 1 month

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Security on JBoss] - Re: SecurityContext

by scott.stark＠jboss.org

"anil.saldhana(a)jboss.com" wrote : | anonymous wrote : I'm not seeing how the run-as identity and roles fits into the SecurityContext. How does it? | RunAsIdentity is not applicable to every JEMS project. It is more of an JEE aspect. Both RAI and Roles will be keyed in the context map inside SC implementation. | Forget about the specific RunAsIdentity notion. This should be a subset of a general trust configuration where there is an assertion that the caller is X with proof of identity Y. The javaee run-as notion has X=some-role with Y=the-ability-to-deploy-a-component-with-a-run-as-tag. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3991426#3991426 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3991426

18 years, 1 month

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Security on JBoss] - Re: Generalizing the JACC service

by scott.stark＠jboss.org

Start a new thread for describing that you mean as doAs. The Subject.doAs mechanism is purely a function of the java2 security model at the base level. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3991422#3991422 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3991422

18 years, 1 month

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Security on JBoss] - Re: SecurityContext

by scott.stark＠jboss.org

This has to be driven by the security aspects and the usecases I outlined. The SecurityAssociation is at best an implementation detail of some aspects. We should be looking to propagate security context info via the invocation payload rather than thread locals. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3991420#3991420 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3991420

18 years, 1 month

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Remoting, Unified Invokers] - Re: source for 1.4.3

by scott.stark＠jboss.org

See http://wiki.jboss.org/wiki/Wiki.jsp?page=JBossRemoting_source_and_build for general source/build info. The 1.4.3 release would be available by checking out: cvs -d:pserver:anonymous@anoncvs.forge.jboss.com:/cvsroot/jboss checkout -r remoting_1_4_3_GA JBossRemoting View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3991415#3991415 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3991415

18 years, 1 month

1
0
0 / 0

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

jboss-dev-forums December 2006