[JBoss JIRA] (WFCORE-2746) Move elytron management security tests from full to core
by James Perkins (JIRA)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFCORE-2746?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugi... ]
James Perkins commented on WFCORE-2746:
---------------------------------------
I'm not sure I follow the argument against #1. The idea would be something like this:
{code:java}
abstract class AbstractTest {
@Test
public test1(){}
@Test
public test2(){}
@Test
public test3(){}
@Test
public test4(){}
}
{code}
{code:java}
@RunsWith(Arquillian.class)
@ServerSetup(Test1.ConfigureServer.class)
public class Test1 extends AbstractTest {
public static class ConfigureServer implements ServerSetupTask {
@Override
public void setup(ManagementClient client) throws Exception {}
@Override
public void tearDown(ManagementClient client) throws Exception {}
}
}
{code}
You'd just repeat the abstract implementation for each configuration you want to test. Again though without know which test this is I could be off basis.
> Move elytron management security tests from full to core
> --------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: WFCORE-2746
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFCORE-2746
> Project: WildFly Core
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: Domain Management, Security, Test Suite
> Reporter: Brian Stansberry
>
> Since until recently the elytron subsystem wasn't part of the core feature pack, a lot of integration tests of its use ended up in the WildFly full testsuite instead of in core. This task is to get tests that are only testing core functionality moved into the core testsuite. Because that's the right thing to do, but also because it's useful in practice by eliminating a cause for messy coordinated changes to core and full such that code changes in core can be tested.
> Corresponding Wildfly JIRA: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFLY-8723
> There are a number of aspects to this, for which I'll create subtasks.
> Following is an initial list of tests that should be moved. *This is meant to be a living list, with things added as they are noticed.* So anyone should feel free to edit this JIRA description to add things to the list.
> -org.jboss.as.test.integration.security.perimeter.* [2]-
> -org.jboss.as.test.manualmode.mgmt.elytron.HttpMgmtInterfaceElytronAuthenticationTestCase-
> -org.jboss.as.test.integration.domain.AbstractSlaveHCAuthenticationTestCase and subclasses.[1]-
> org.jboss.as.test.integration.security.credentialreference [2]
> integration/elytron/
> [1] One subclass of this is not related to elytron but should be moved to core too. I haven't looked closely but it uses vault, which may be why it is in full. But we can use vault in the core testsuite now.
> [2] Currently using Arquillian.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.2.3#72005)
9 years, 1 month
[JBoss JIRA] (WFCORE-2806) Global domain config for unique GC log file name and path
by Brian Stansberry (JIRA)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFCORE-2806?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugi... ]
Brian Stansberry commented on WFCORE-2806:
------------------------------------------
Possibilities:
1) Where possible use a different expression resolver for these such that the standard ${jboss.server.xxx} properties available on the server are also available to the HC. This would only work if the expression is being resolved in a context where there is one and only one relevant server, i.e. during server launch.
2) A simpler variant of that would be
<option value="-Xloggc:${jboss.domain.servers.dir}/${jboss.special.property.for.server.being.launched}/log/gc.log"/>
That's simpler because now we don't have to worry about all the different standard ${jboss.server.xxx}
properties and the different ways they can be configured. But the user has to understand this special property.
3) Another variant is to use special expression syntax instead of a special property:
<option value="-Xloggc:${jboss.domain.servers.dir}/##server.name##/log/gc.log"/>
But I don't like that at all as it opens up a whole can of worms where now we may need to check for that syntax elsewhere, need new expression resolution logic etc.
The fly in the ointment for all of these is the "This would only work if the expression is being resolved in a context where there is one and only one relevant server, i.e. during server launch" bit. So something like this would not work normally:
/host=master:read-resource(recursive=true,resolve-expressions=true)
Even something more targeted would not work:
/host=master/server-config=server-one/jvm=default:read-resource(recursive=true,resolve-expressions=true)
This is because the read-resource op is generic. And adding a lot of exception logic to it to handle special cases is not likely to be feasible.
> Global domain config for unique GC log file name and path
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: WFCORE-2806
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFCORE-2806
> Project: WildFly Core
> Issue Type: Feature Request
> Components: Domain Management
> Reporter: Aaron Ogburn
> Labels: domain-mode
>
> Customers often try to do something like the following in their server group for domain mode to easily get a unique gc log path for all server group members:
> {code}
> <option value="-Xloggc:${jboss.server.log.dir}/gc.log"/>
> {code}
> But jboss.server.log.dir can't be resolved at that point so it fails. The next best thing that can be done is:
> {code}
> <option value="-Xloggc:${jboss.domain.servers.dir}/server-name/log/gc.log"/>
> {code}
> But then that has to be set for each server. It'd help if domain mode had some way of easily setting a gc.log path in a server-group level or higher that could be set once and result in unique gc log paths for all servers in the server-group.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.2.3#72005)
9 years, 1 month
[JBoss JIRA] (REMJMX-139) Unify default wildfly-config.xml across clients (Elytron)
by Darran Lofthouse (JIRA)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/REMJMX-139?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin... ]
Darran Lofthouse moved JBEAP-10911 to REMJMX-139:
-------------------------------------------------
Project: Remoting JMX (was: JBoss Enterprise Application Platform)
Key: REMJMX-139 (was: JBEAP-10911)
Workflow: classic default workflow (was: CDW with loose statuses v1)
Component/s: Security
(was: Security)
Affects Version/s: (was: 7.1.0.DR11)
Fix Version/s: 3.0.0.Beta4
(was: 7.1.0.DR18)
> Unify default wildfly-config.xml across clients (Elytron)
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: REMJMX-139
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/REMJMX-139
> Project: Remoting JMX
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Security
> Reporter: Darran Lofthouse
> Assignee: Darran Lofthouse
> Priority: Blocker
> Labels: authentication-client, wildfly-config
> Fix For: 3.0.0.Beta4
>
>
> Some client facing JARs contains default Elytron client configuration in `META-INF/wildfly-config.xml`:
> {code}
> bin/client/jboss-cli-client.jar
> bin/client/jboss-client.jar
> modules/system/layers/base/org/jboss/as/protocol/main/wildfly-protocol-3.0.0.Alpha22-redhat-1.jar
> modules/system/layers/base/org/jboss/as/remoting/main/wildfly-remoting-3.0.0.Alpha22-redhat-1.jar
> modules/system/layers/base/org/jboss/as/cli/main/wildfly-cli-3.0.0.Alpha22-redhat-1.jar
> modules/system/layers/base/org/jboss/remoting-jmx/main/remoting-jmx-3.0.0.Beta2-redhat-1.jar
> modules/system/layers/base/org/jboss/ejb-client/main/jboss-ejb-client-3.0.0.Beta4-redhat-1.jar
> {code}
> The configuration across the libraries is not unified, which could lead to different configuration used for different classpath ordering.
> The issue is mainly with set of allowed SASL mechanisms across the libraries. Here are fragments of mechanism filtering used in the mentioned files:
> {code:xml}
> <allow-all-sasl-mechanisms />
> <allow-sasl-mechanisms names="JBOSS-LOCAL-USER EXTERNAL DIGEST-MD5 PLAIN ANONYMOUS" />
> <allow-sasl-mechanisms names="JBOSS-LOCAL-USER DIGEST-MD5 PLAIN ANONYMOUS" />
> {code}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.2.3#72005)
9 years, 1 month