On 04/19/2014 12:43 PM, arjan tijms wrote:

Hi,

Just wondering, but what is the primary use case for a security manager server side?

While the model obviously makes sense for Applets and Webstart where untrusted code is executed on the user's machine, I found it to be extremely rare for a server to run untrusted code. In fact, I don't think I've ever seen this situation.

I agree with what you are saying. Unfortunately there are a handful of users/developers/sys-admins who are required to run the JVM under the JSM. Might be corporate policy or compliance etc.
Luckily they are a minority. They always pinpoint if there are any particular permission failing under the JSM.

The JSM was really invented around the applet era and has really not seen any major adaptation/overhaul for the s/w industry growth.

There's maybe a case to prevent privilege escalation in case of a legitimate app being hacked, but in practice it doesn't look like a security manager is really being used a lot for that, is it? Instead the default thing to do there seems to be to run the AS under a user with limited rights on the host OS and/or use things like SELinix or Virtual Servers (e.g. XEN) to isolate the complete AS.

Kind regards,

Arjan Tijms

On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 1:53 AM, Jason T. Greene <jgreene@redhat.com> wrote:

Sent from my iPhone

> On Apr 18, 2014, at 5:50 PM, Stuart Douglas <stuart.w.douglas@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Enabling the security manager by default is a terrible idea.

+1000

___________