> Signin is part of the authentication (not authorization), and I concur > that a web framework should provide hooks for it.
Heh :) Don't agree. Authentication should be seen as part of authorization. Authorization is the end-means of seeing whether action x is permitted or not. Authentication is just a possible step to validate whether client a is who he states he is, and to get clear what security attributes are coupled to the client (like roles/ principals, etc). > Not all web sites one may want to build with wicket require complex > model objects that handle authorization. But do they really require > security support from wicket? Then don't use it. It's just a hook. The hook is built on a more generic hook too. We found the need to have a mechanism for authentication that is supported out of the box, and it has been requested by many users. I agree a framework should provide for anything and it's mother, but in this case I think Wicket needed the ability to at least cooperate on this with other layers of your application. Eelco ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid3432&bid#0486&dat1642 _______________________________________________ Wicket-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
