[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-3491?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Daniel John Debrunner updated DERBY-3491:
-----------------------------------------
Attachment: d3491_v01_diff.txt
Initial patch that adds actions to SystemPermission as described.
More testing needed but SystemPrivilegesPermssionTest passes with this patch
which simply replaces SystemPermssion("shutdown") with
SystemPermission("server", "shutdown").
No testing of specific actions has been tried, so the code may be buggy in the
way it handles action but wanted to throw the code out there to give others a
chance to see the direction.
> Change SystemPermission to be a two arguement permission with a name (object
> the permission is on) and an action.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DERBY-3491
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-3491
> Project: Derby
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Security
> Reporter: Daniel John Debrunner
> Attachments: d3491_v01_diff.txt
>
>
> With the additional system permissions proposed in DERBY-3462 I wonder if it
> makes sense to change the style of names & actions in SystemPermission.
> Today a "shutdown" name is proposed and potential for future "shutdownEngine"
> and "shutdownServer" with no actions.
> DERBY-3462 is proposing names of jmxControl, serverControl, engineControl etc
> also with no actions.
> Looking at the standard Permission class it seems the name is meant to
> represent an object that the permission applies to and action represent
> actions on that object.
> Thus it would seem to make more sense and be consistent with other
> Permissions to have:
> name=server action=control | monitor | shutdown
> name=engine action=control | monitor | shutdown
> name=jmx action=control
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
