-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/65121/#review195307
-----------------------------------------------------------




webapp/src/main/java/org/apache/atlas/web/filters/AtlasAuthenticationFilter.java
Lines 134 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/65121/#comment274484>

    Please could you confirm that thetesting including checking that any time 
interval set here is  effective.



webapp/src/main/java/org/apache/atlas/web/filters/AtlasAuthenticationFilter.java
Lines 135 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/65121/#comment274485>

    Shouldn't we validate that this content is a positive integer (I am not 
sure what the highest valid value is - we could check that as well) and produce 
a meaningful error message if it is not valid.


- David Radley


On Jan. 12, 2018, 11:38 a.m., Nixon Rodrigues wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/65121/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Jan. 12, 2018, 11:38 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for atlas, Apoorv Naik, Ashutosh Mestry, Madhan Neethiraj, and 
> Sarath Subramanian.
> 
> 
> Bugs: ATLAS-2352
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ATLAS-2352
> 
> 
> Repository: atlas
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> This patch includes fix to configure validity for Kerberos DelegationToken.
> 
> Property to be added in atlas-application.properties.
> 
> *atlas.authentication.method.kerberos.token.validity*=3600
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   docs/src/site/twiki/Authentication-Authorization.twiki 1e35ceb4 
>   
> webapp/src/main/java/org/apache/atlas/web/filters/AtlasAuthenticationFilter.java
>  e8020dbb 
> 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/65121/diff/1/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Kerberos delegation token expiration time is set correctly in hadoop-auth 
> cookie.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Nixon Rodrigues
> 
>

Reply via email to