OK thanks for the clarification Tom. Good thing I made a backup :-)
On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 14:57:00 -0800, Tom Cornilliac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > my point here was that farCry is referencing its own security comonets at > > #application.packagepath#.security > > In a few places yes. But like it wrote earlier, this is mainly for > internal functions like the install/deploy scripts and some migration > stuff. It's very likely that this is done intentionally to avoid > problems during the install. > > > and not using the setting from _serverSpecificVars.cfm, namely > > application.securitypackagepath > > This is simply not true. A quick search of the core shows 25 places > where application.securitypackagepath is used. In addition, Farcry > creates instances of application.securitypackagepath.authorisation and > application.securitypackagepath.authentication in request.dmSec as > oAuthorisation and oAuthentication respectively. These two components > handle the bulk of the security work for each request. In fact, > together they're referenced 139 times in the core. > > I currently use a custom security package for our Intranet and I'm > having no problems at all . > > ~tom > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to farcry-dev as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Aussie Macromedia Developers: http://lists.daemon.com.au/ > --- You are currently subscribed to farcry-dev as: [email protected] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aussie Macromedia Developers: http://lists.daemon.com.au/
