This sounds reasonable to me as well. 

On Jul 27, 2012, at 1:10 AM, Shane Bryzak <[email protected]> wrote:

> I had a quick chat with Pete and Jason and they brought me up to speed.  
> After much consideration I think the best way to proceed would be 4.b), with 
> the more complex features such as IDM and permission management handled 
> external to DS.
> 
> On 27/07/12 08:41, Mark Struberg wrote:
>> Oki, here we go.
>> 
>> We had a quick chat about where we basically stand today.
>> 
>> 
>> This is not intended to be a a 'what shall be' but more a 'what do we have' 
>> + 'what do we really need' email.
>> 
>> 
>> 1.) What we have today:
>> I've looked at the Security module and what I understand it's pretty 
>> powerful and complex.
>> There are aprox. 30++ Interfaces which are very flexible but also very hard 
>> to get right. Having lots of flexibility also makes it easy to do things 
>> wrong as user. E.g. IdentityManager which allows to create users. The 
>> RoleQuery and the whole Role management is pretty complete from the API 
>> level but I've never seen it used in such detail in any application yet. 
>> Most times there is an additional mapping role -> rights. And the right is 
>> what gets used in the application (e.g. in rendered= ).
>> 
>> 2.) What is available in projects:
>> In my last 10 projects we never had the choice to define our own login 
>> logic. Some customers had radius, others authenticated against SAP or 
>> kerberos. Then there are some LDAP and we even have a single sign on based 
>> on Smalltalk. And there is absolutely no way to get rid of those! Most of 
>> the time you cannot even create your own users... Of course there is the 
>> need for a simple html based user login for _some_ applications. But this is 
>> most times only needed for green-field projects. Whenever you do projects 
>> for a bigger company you most likely will find some well established SSO in 
>> place.
>> 
>> 3.) what is needed in those projects:
>> I did quite some integration already in the past and the only thing which we 
>> did really need was
>> 
>>   3.a.) to express some interrest: "current user likes to do actionX"
>> This can be done via a @Secured interceptor, via @ViewConfig, via @PageBean 
>> etc -> might get provided by DS.
>> 
>>   3.b.) to evaluate the "is the current user allowed to do actionX"
>> Like with JAAS Voters this can be done via a simple Interface which returns 
>> a boolean. This is really similar to what Seam2 had and also what CODI did.
>> All the evaluation and binding to an existing authorisation and 
>> authentication can be done in this AccessVoter/checkPermission. -> we might 
>> provide the Interfaces in DS. The impl is _always_ up to the user.
>> 
>> 4.) what are our options:
>> 
>>   4.a.) fully implement our own security manager. This will surely still 
>> take some time as this is a complex topic! Many of the interfaces are ok but 
>> there is not yet an impl behind it. My personal estimation is that we now 
>> hit the 15% line, and a few people already spent a good amount of power for 
>> it. So this will not be finished for the next 5 months I fear.
>>  4.b) implement a simple Voter + @Secured and let the user deal with the 
>> rest. In both Seam2 and CODI this turned out to not only be extremely 
>> flexible, but it is also rather easy to integrate [1]. We could also provide 
>> an additional module which contains a composite component with login userId 
>> + pwd fields + a simple backend for it. But just as a small additional 
>> module which might optionally be used for easier integration into JSF apps 
>> if there is not yet an existing SSO implementation.
>> 
>> LieGrue,
>> strub
>> 
>> 
>> [1] 
>> https://github.com/struberg/lightweightEE/blob/master/gui/src/main/java/de/jaxenter/eesummit/caroline/gui/security/AdminAccessVoter.java#L36
>> 
>> 
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: Jason Porter <[email protected]>
>>> To: [email protected]
>>> Cc:
>>> Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2012 9:03 PM
>>> Subject: IDM impl feedback
>>> 
>>> T he implementation that's in HEAD right now is incomplete. There are many
>>> methods which are basic IDE generated stubs in multiple classes. I'll hold
>>> off on any feedback until it's complete.
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> Jason Porter
>>> http://lightguard-jp.blogspot.com
>>> http://twitter.com/lightguardjp
>>> 
>>> Software Engineer
>>> Open Source Advocate
>>> Author of Seam Catch - Next Generation Java Exception Handling
>>> 
>>> PGP key id: 926CCFF5
>>> PGP key available at: keyserver.net, pgp.mit.edu
>>> 
> 
> 

Reply via email to