On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 8:31 AM, Jeremy Haile <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Another differentiator is that JSecurity provides a session framework > that is not limited to being shared across just web-based applications. > We have users that share sessions across multiple environments, such as > Swing apps talking to a server over Spring remoting or RMI, applets, and > web applications - so they can all share common session information in a > heterogeneous environment. > I like this idea! We have an application that has a Swing client and we talk to the server via Spring remoting. This shared session idea sounds intriguing. I might have to look into switching to JSecurity! :) > This simplicity and power is unmatched in any existing security > framework out-of-the-box. > > Finally, JSecurity strives for simplicity in all areas. To this end, it > explicitly supports common security mechanisms used in most applications > such as roles and permissions. This makes code more readable, limits > the amount of custom coding required, and makes security definitions > very concise and readable. Despite our goals of simplicity we also aim > for flexibility - so out of the box the framework should be extremely > easy to get up and running, requiring minimal configuration and custom > code. But for users who have much more advanced needs, JSecurity > provides the pluggability and extensibility to be used for almost any > security application. > The simplicity is definitely needed. Spring Security is confusing at times. They've tried to clean things up a bit in the latest version(s), but it's still tough to wrap your head around. I usually just copy/paste something that I know works. :) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
