Edgardo

Yep.  What are some others you'd be looking for?  What we're basically
doing is preferring a delegated provider model.  Kerberos is one we
plan to knock out as well

Thanks
Joe

On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 7:10 AM, Edgardo Vega <[email protected]> wrote:
> Joe,
>
> Yes I was looking for username and password. Seems like NIFI-655 will setup
> the base to allow for other username/password authentication providers
> other than LDAP and AD.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Edgardo
>
> On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 5:31 PM, Joe Witt <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> i conflated two different issues in my response so to clarify:
>>
>> I do not believe we're supporting basic authentication in our quest to
>> obtain user supplied identify information at this time.
>>
>> I do know that once we have that data we're delegating to an identity
>> login provider which we first have implemented to support AD/DS using
>> LDAP.
>>
>> The actual details available thus far are in the branch for NIFI-655
>> as found here [1] and the higher level description of the goal is
>> found here [2] but it is light on implementation details.  Those are
>> better found in the JIRA for NIFI-655 it appears [3].
>>
>> [1] https://github.com/apache/nifi/tree/NIFI-655
>> [2]
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NIFI/Pluggable+Authentication
>> [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-655
>>
>> Thanks
>> Joe
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 4:39 PM, Joe Witt <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > Edgardo
>> >
>> > We're tackling username and password based authentication in NIFI-655.
>> > It will not be utilizing/supporting basic authentication but perhaps
>> > you just mean uname/pword?
>> >
>> > The approach in NIFI-655 will delegate to a Directory Server/Active
>> Directory.
>> >
>> > Thanks
>> > Joe
>> >
>> > On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Edgardo Vega <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> >> Wasn't there work being done on Basic Authentication? Just curious to
>> see
>> >> where that is along the development cycle.
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Cheers,
>> >>
>> >> Edgardo
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers,
>
> Edgardo

Reply via email to