[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPIDJMS-150?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15157326#comment-15157326
]
Robbie Gemmell edited comment on QPIDJMS-150 at 2/22/16 5:42 PM:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Reopening, some of the tests failed in a new (to me) way on Travis and Appveyor:
https://travis-ci.org/apache/qpid-jms/builds/111005093
https://ci.appveyor.com/project/stumped2/qpid-jms/build/205
Worked fine locally for me on 2 JVMs, for Tim, and on the ASF Jenkins. Need to
take a look why Travis+Appveyor choked.
was (Author: gemmellr):
Reopening, some of the tests failed in a new (to me) way on Travis:
https://travis-ci.org/apache/qpid-jms/builds/111005093
Worked fine locally for me on 2 JVMs, for Tim, and on the ASF Jenkins. Need to
take a look why Travis choked.
> Scram SHA SASL support for authentication
> -----------------------------------------
>
> Key: QPIDJMS-150
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPIDJMS-150
> Project: Qpid JMS
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: qpid-jms-client
> Reporter: Keith Wall
> Assignee: Robbie Gemmell
> Fix For: 0.9.0
>
> Attachments:
> 0001-QPIDJMS-150-Add-support-for-SASL-SCRAM-SHA1-256-RFC-.patch
>
>
> The SCRAM SHA-1 and 256 SASL mechanisms https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5802
> offer better security than older SASL implementations. In particular the
> authentication information stored in the authentication database is not
> sufficient to impersonate the client if the database were to be stolen.
> (The Java Broker already supports these mechanisms. The intention is to
> switch to recommend SCRAM instead of CRAM-MD5 shortly. One barrier to making
> this switch is the absence of support in the client).
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
