Re: [Architecture] [C5] Carbon Secure Vault YAML Configuration

Hi Kishanthan, When we have the master-keys.yaml and secrets.properties yaml file path in secure-vault.yaml configuration the end user do not need to override a method to explain how the paths are taken but rather handled within the secure vauilt implementation itself. So if the paths are

Re: [Architecture] [C5] Carbon Secure Vault YAML Configuration

Hi Niranjan, Ideally, the OSGi / non-OSGi check should happen at the secure vault initialization phase. The rest of the execution should happen accordingly without checking for OSGi / non-OSGi. However, if we delegate providing other file paths (secret.properties, master-key.yaml) to relevant

Re: [Architecture] [C5] Carbon Secure Vault YAML Configuration

Could you explain the advantage of this proposed approach based on OSGi vs non-OSGi mode of execution? On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 9:15 AM, Vidura Nanayakkara wrote: > Hi All, > > An example for a secure vault YAML configuration file is as shown below > according to the current

Re: [Architecture] [C5] Carbon Secure Vault YAML Configuration

Hi Jayanga, On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 10:09 AM, Jayanga Dissanayake wrote: > Hi Niranjan, > > You are correct we should follow the same way as msf4j to detect whether > it is OSGi mode or not. > The properties suggested are to avoid the OSGi mode check in several > places. With

Re: [Architecture] [C5] Carbon Secure Vault YAML Configuration

Hi Niranjan, You are correct we should follow the same way as msf4j to detect whether it is OSGi mode or not. The properties suggested are to avoid the OSGi mode check in several places. With the suggested properties, secure-vault.yaml will have all the information it needs for the

Re: [Architecture] [C5] Carbon Secure Vault YAML Configuration

Hi Vidura, We can identify whether it is in OSGi mode or non-OSGi mode by checking if the bundleContext is set. If it is not set, then it is in non-OSGi mode. This is the way we have done for msf4j. Any reason for this new approach? Regards, Nira On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 9:37 AM, Lakshman

Re: [Architecture] [C5] Carbon Secure Vault YAML Configuration

Hi Vidura, On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 9:15 AM, Vidura Nanayakkara wrote: > Hi All, > > An example for a secure vault YAML configuration file is as shown below > according to the current implementation. > > secretRepository: > type: org.wso2.carbon.kernel.securevault.repository.

Re: [Architecture] [C5][IS 6.0.0] Add and Update Group UI for IS 6.0.0

Hi Kasun, On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 1:55 PM, KasunG Gajasinghe wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 8:50 AM, Pushpalanka Jayawardhana > wrote: > >> >> >> On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 8:46 AM, Pushpalanka Jayawardhana > > wrote: >> >>> Hi All, >>> >>>

[Architecture] [C5] Carbon Secure Vault YAML Configuration

Hi All, An example for a secure vault YAML configuration file is as shown below according to the current implementation. secretRepository: type: org.wso2.carbon.kernel.securevault.repository.DefaultSecretRepository parameters: privateKeyAlias: wso2carbon keystoreLocation:

Re: [Architecture] Define Username Claim in Domain Level

On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 6:50 AM, Thanuja Jayasinghe wrote: > Hi Nuwandi, > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 1:54 PM, Nuwandi Wickramasinghe > wrote: > >> >> >> On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 12:42 PM, Thanuja Jayasinghe >> wrote: >> >>> Hi Gayan, >>>

Re: [Architecture] [C5][IS 6.0.0] Password History Validation

On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 7:44 AM, Gayan Gunawardana wrote: > Hi All, > > We are in the process of implementing password history validation feature > for IS 6.0.0. Architecture of this feature was previously discussed in [1] > by Isura for IS 5.3.0. We plan to follow same

Re: [Architecture] [C5][IS 6.0.0] Add and Update Group UI for IS 6.0.0

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 8:50 AM, Pushpalanka Jayawardhana wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 8:46 AM, Pushpalanka Jayawardhana > wrote: > >> Hi All, >> >> I am working on implementing 'add group' and 'update group' UIs for IS >> 6.0.0 as per the wire-frames [1]

Re: [Architecture] [C5][IS 6.0.0] Password History Validation

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 9:39 AM, Gayan Gunawardana wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 10:19 AM, Imesh Gunaratne wrote: >> >> >> ​Would you mind explaining the purpose of the field SALT_VALUE? >> > > In order to compare user given password with stored password