FYI as suggested by Christine I created a new Triplesec JIRA project and
moved your two issues over there.

Alex

David Jencks wrote:
> Now that triplesec is imported I started looking at the code with an eye to 
> making it more jacc-friendly.  I started with updating a bit of the build, 
> mostly creating a dependencyManagement section and a pluginManagement section 
> in the root pom to track all the external dependency and plugin versions.  I 
> also updated to current apacheDS and updated a few other dependencies.  See 
> DIR-198
> 
> It would be great if a committer with IDEA could spend a few minutes and 
> change the package names to live at apache :-)  although warning me first 
> would be even better.
> 
> At this point I have a question and a plan :-)
> 
> I don't understand how application id is supposed to relate to a Subject or a 
> profile or a user.  Currently it looks to me as if when a user logs in they 
> are restricted to working in one application.  IMO this is sort of ridiculous 
> :-), so probably I'm missing something important here: explanations welcome.
> 
> I'm biased from working with jacc, but I would tend to rename applicationId 
> to policyContextId since the scope of whatever is associated with such an id 
> may not always be an application.  In particular jacc deals in 
> policyContextIds, one per j2ee application module.
> 
> On to the plan....
> 
> 1. Depending on the explanations for the above question, either keep a 
> Profile per applicationId and have SafeHausPrincipal include a map of 
> applicationId >> Profile or have the Profile contain the map of applicationid 
> >> ApplicationProfile (or PolicyContextProfile).
> 
> 2. The current Permission class is not a java.security.Permission.  I propose 
> to rename it StringPermission (since it works on string equality), extend 
> java.security.Permission, and introduce a StringPermissionCollection.  BTW I 
> don't understand why triplesec Permission includes the applicationName.  
> 
> 3. Replace all use of the triplesec Permissions class with 
> java.security.Permissions.  This  uses the StringPermissionCollection class 
> for quick implies calculations and allows use of all other permission classes 
> such as those used in jacc.  This is going to replace a bunch of proprietary 
> triplesec methods with "implies"
> 
> This much should be pretty straightforward and keep functionality pretty much 
> the same.
> 
> 4. try to understand how the current StringPermissions are being stored in 
> ldap and figure out how to store the permissions needed for JACC. IIRC Alex 
> mentioned StateFactory as an elegant solution.
> 
> At that point it should be really easy to use triplesec as a jacc provider in 
> at least geronimo.
> 
> How plausible is this?  Comments?
> 
> I opened DIR-199 and am attaching the start I made on (2) so others can look 
> at what I'm up to. This is not finished yet by any means.
> 
> thanks
> david jencks
> 
> 
> 
> 

begin:vcard
fn:Alex Karasulu
n:Karasulu;Alex
org:Apache Software Foundation;Apache Directory
adr:;;1005 N. Marsh Wind Way;Ponte Vedra ;FL;32082;USA
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
title:Member, V.P.
tel;work:(904) 791-2766
tel;fax:(904) 808-4789
tel;home:(904) 808-4789
tel;cell:(904) 315-4901
note;quoted-printable:AIM: alexokarasulu=0D=0A=
	MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
	Yahoo!: alexkarasulu=0D=0A=
	IRC: aok=0D=0A=
	PGP ID: 1024D/4E1370F8 BBCC E8D8 8756 2D51 C3D4 014A 3662 F96F 4E13 70F8=0D=0A=
	
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:http://people.apache.org/~akarasulu
version:2.1
end:vcard

Reply via email to