On 10/12/17 8:18 AM, Harsha Wardhana B wrote:
On Thursday 12 October 2017 08:40 PM, mandy chung wrote:
On 10/12/17 1:16 AM, Harsha Wardhana B wrote:
I'm thinking any better alternative to the new property name??
com.sun.management.jmxremote.password.hashes
com.sun.management.jmxremote.password.asHashes com.sun.management.jmxremote.passowrd.toHashes
I suggest to rename
com.sun.management.jmxremote.password.hashpasswords to
com.sun.management.jmxremote.password.hashes.
What do you think?
We want the property to suggest an action and hence *.toHashes would
be better than *.hashes.
"toHashes" suffix is also good to me.
67 # If multiple entries are found for the same role name, then the
last one 68 # is used.
If there are multiple entries of the same role, will all entries be
overridden with hash value? It may be better to detect as an error
when there are more than one entries of the same role?
It would be better to log a warning. Throwing an error would seem a
bit extreme.
What happen to the duplicated entries? The clear password will
stay? Warning is fine.
The duplicated entries will be removed. The last entry for a given
role along with its hashed password will be written into the file.
The other alternative is to override it with its hash value and output a
warning that this entry is ignored. This will leave it for the user to
remove the entries.
Mandy
