Hi,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected]
> [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Montag, 27. April 2015 10:39
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Antwort: RE: Antwort: RE: Custom WS-Security Policy for Webservice
> 
> Hi,
> 
> > > If not, I would recommend to set endpoint in CXF class https://
> > > github.com/apache/cxf/blob/master/rt/ws/policy/src/main/java/org/
> > > apache/cxf/ws/policy/PolicyAnnotationListener.java , loading method
> > > handleEvent() case ENDPOINT_SELECTED and debug policy loading.
> > Thanks for the hint, I'll give it a try.
> 
> I've debugged the PlicyAnnotationListener at the recommended position, but no
> result. Both methods in case ENDPOINT_SELECTED (addPolicies(...) and
> addEndpointImplPolicies(...)) do not add a policy since the policy lists are
> always empty (null). The reason for this is probably that the PropertyMap of 
> the
> endpoint interface is also null. In summray, no policies (policy annotations) 
> are
> found.

Did you see @Policies annotations for the implClass in 
addEndpointImplPolicies(...) in debugger variables explorer? 
Is the implementation class correct one?

> 
> Do you have any idea/recommendation how to proceed? Do you think the
> reason might be that I missed some important configuration, e.g., a namespace
> in the policy file or something else (I don't think so since the examples 
> don't use
> any custom namespaces)?
> 
> In which environment did you run your sample projects? Maybe I'll give it a 
> try
> to switch...

I don't see obvious problem in your code.
Try to run following CXF system test: 
https://github.com/apache/cxf/blob/master/systests/ws-security/src/test/java/org/apache/cxf/systest/ws/policy/JavaFirstPolicyServiceTest.java
 
It uses service class with very similar @Policy annotation: 
https://github.com/apache/cxf/blob/master/systests/ws-security/src/test/java/org/apache/cxf/systest/ws/policy/javafirst/BindingSimpleServiceImpl.java
 

What is the difference in your case?

Regards,
Andrei.

> 
> Thanks
> Niko
> 
> >
> > Thanks
> > Niko
> >
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Andrei.
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: [email protected]
> > > > [mailto:[email protected]]
> > > > Sent: Dienstag, 21. April 2015 12:46
> > > > To: [email protected]
> > > > Subject: Antwort: RE: Custom WS-Security Policy for Webservice
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > thanks for the link to the examples. I'm using a similar
> > > configuration now, but
> > > > without success.
> > > >
> > > > Concerning your questions: What I want to achieve is basically the
> > policy
> > > > described here (
> > > >
> >
> http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-sx/security-policy/examples/ws-sp-usecases-
> > > > examples.html#_Toc274723250
> > > > ). The only difference is that I want to use Basic128 as the
> > > Algorithm Suite. This
> > > > is the requirement of our customer. Thus, I do not register an
> > interceptor
> > > > provider. The policy assertions I use should be standard, right?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks
> > > > Niko
> > > >
> > > > Andrei Shakirin <[email protected]> schrieb am 20.04.2015
> 21:06:03:
> > > >
> > > > > Von: Andrei Shakirin <[email protected]>
> > > > > An: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
> > > > > Datum: 20.04.2015 21:07
> > > > > Betreff: RE: Custom WS-Security Policy for Webservice
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > Take a look in following system tests:
> > > > >
> https://github.com/apache/cxf/blob/master/systests/ws-security/src/
> > > > >
> > test/java/org/apache/cxf/systest/ws/policy/JavaFirstPolicyService.java
> > > > >
> https://github.com/apache/cxf/blob/master/systests/ws-security/src/
> > > > > test/java/org/apache/cxf/systest/ws/policy/javafirst/
> > > > > OperationSimpleServiceImpl.java
> > > > >
> > > > > One possible issue is that uri attribute in @Policy annotation
> > > > > can
> 
> > be
> > > > > required to be in URI form (classpath:/xxx, file:///xxx).
> > > > > Do you register interceptor provider for the custom policy
> assertion
> > > > > or it contains standard assertions? What is your expectation
> > > > > from activating of custom policy?
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Andrei.
> > > > >
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: [email protected]
> > > > > > [mailto:[email protected]]
> > > > > > Sent: Montag, 20. April 2015 12:24
> > > > > > To: [email protected]
> > > > > > Subject: Custom WS-Security Policy for Webservice
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm trying to apply a custom WS-Security policy to a web
> service.
> > > > > > I'm
> > > > using
> > > > > > wsimport from the jaxws-maven-plugin to generate the SEI. The
> > > > > > implementation of the SEI looks like this:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >         import javax.jws.WebService;
> > > > > >         import org.apache.cxf.annotations.Policy;
> > > > > >         import org.jboss.ws.api.annotation.EndpointConfig;
> > > > > >
> > > > > >         @WebService(
> > > > > >                 portName = "VehicleOrderRetailDelivery",
> > > > > >                 serviceName = "VehicleOrderRetailDelivery",
> > > > > >                 targetNamespace = "some/namespace",
> > > > > >                 wsdlLocation =
> > > > > > "/WEB-INF/wsdl/VehicleOrderRetailDelivery.wsdl",
> > > > > >                 endpointInterface =
> > > > > > "mypackage.IVehicleOrderRetailDelivery"
> > > > > >         )
> > > > > >         @Policies({@Policy(placement =
> > > > > > Policy.Placement.BINDING,
> 
> > uri
> > > > > > = "CustomPolicy.xml", includeInWSDL=true)})
> > > > > >         @EndpointConfig(configFile =
> > > > "WEB-INF/jaxws-endpoint-config.xml"
> > > > > > , configName = "Custom WS-Security Endpoint")
> > > > > >         public class VehicleOrderRetailDelivery implements
> > > > > > IVehicleOrderRetailDelivery {
> > > > > >
> > > > > >                 public void report(@XmlElement(required =
> > > > > > true)
> > > > > ReportRequestType
> > > > > > reportRequest) { ... }
> > > > > >         }
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The problem is that the custom WS-Security policy is not active.
> 
> > If
> > > > > > I
> > > > send
> > > > > > requests to the endpoint using SoapUI, I get a soap fault
> telling
> > me
> > > > that
> > > > > > the message contains encrypted data. I'm using Wildfly 8.1.0
> > > > > > and I've already set the log level to DEBUG but there is no
> > information
> > > > > > in the
> > > > log
> > > > > > what goes wrong or why the policy is not active. This part of
> the
> > > > > > log makes me believe that there is some kind of policy that it
> is
> > > > > > loaded
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 21:43:17,813 FINE
> > > > > > [org.apache.cxf.phase.PhaseInterceptorChain]
> > > > (default
> > > > > >  task-5) Chain
> org.apache.cxf.phase.PhaseInterceptorChain@3aa6c815
> > > > > > was modified. `Current flow:` receive [PolicyInInterceptor,
> > > > > > EndpointAssociationInterceptor, AttachmentInInterceptor]
> > > > > >   pre-stream [CertConstraintsInterceptor]
> > > > > >   post-stream [StaxInInterceptor]
> > > > > >   read [WSDLGetInterceptor, ReadHeadersInterceptor,
> > > > > > SoapActionInInterceptor, StartBodyInterceptor]
> > > > > >   pre-protocol [EnableDecoupledFaultInterceptor,
> MEXInInterceptor,
> > > > > > MustUnderstandInterceptor]
> > > > > >   pre-protocol-frontend [HandlerAuthInterceptor]
> > > > > >   post-protocol [CheckFaultInterceptor,
> > > > JAXBAttachmentSchemaValidationHack
> > > > > > ]
> > > > > >   unmarshal [DocLiteralInInterceptor, SoapHeaderInterceptor]
> > > > > >   pre-logical [NsCtxSelectorStoreInterceptor,
> > > > OneWayProcessorInterceptor,
> > > > > > MustUnderstandEndingInterceptor]
> > > > > >   post-logical [WrapperClassInInterceptor]
> > > > > >   pre-invoke [SwAInInterceptor, HolderInInterceptor]
> > > > > >   invoke [ServiceInvokerInterceptor,
> > > > > > UltimateReceiverMustUnderstandInterceptor]
> > > > > >   post-invoke [OutgoingChainInterceptor,
> StaxInEndingInterceptor]
> > > > > >
> > > > > > but why is it not active? Does anybody have an idea why the
> custom
> > > > policy
> > > > > > is not loaded? Any hints are highly appreciated.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Cheers
> > > > > > Nik

Reply via email to