DO NOT REPLY [Bug 50887] Enhancement to set security-provider within AjpAprProcessor

2011-06-03 Thread bugzilla
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50887 Mark Thomas changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 50887] Enhancement to set security-provider within AjpAprProcessor

2011-03-14 Thread bugzilla
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50887 --- Comment #5 from pkn...@mtg.de 2011-03-14 12:58:25 EDT --- (In reply to comment #4) > Created an attachment (id=26765) --> (https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26765) [details] > Proposed patch for Tomcat 6 I have teste

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 50887] Enhancement to set security-provider within AjpAprProcessor

2011-03-13 Thread bugzilla
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50887 Mark Thomas changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #26742|0 |1 is obsolete|

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 50887] Enhancement to set security-provider within AjpAprProcessor

2011-03-13 Thread bugzilla
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50887 --- Comment #3 from Mark Thomas 2011-03-13 10:01:45 EDT --- Fixed in 7.0.x and will be in 7.0.12 onwards. -- Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 50887] Enhancement to set security-provider within AjpAprProcessor

2011-03-12 Thread bugzilla
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50887 --- Comment #2 from Mark Thomas 2011-03-12 04:57:53 EST --- I've had a chance to look at this further. With regard to the three points I raised previously: > - Security providers are normally configured at the JVM level I can see why you

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 50887] Enhancement to set security-provider within AjpAprProcessor

2011-03-08 Thread bugzilla
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50887 --- Comment #1 from pkn...@mtg.de 2011-03-08 05:19:58 EST --- Mark Thomas has commented by email: >The patch raises a couple of questions for me. > - Security providers are normally configured at the JVM level. > - Patches that change one o

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 50887] New: Enhancement to set security-provider within AjpAprProcessor

2011-03-08 Thread bugzilla
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50887 Summary: Enhancement to set security-provider within AjpAprProcessor Product: Tomcat 6 Version: 6.0.32 Platform: PC OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW

Re: Enhancement to set security-provider within AjpAprProcessor

2011-03-07 Thread Mark Thomas
On 07/03/2011 18:01, Konstantin Kolinko wrote: > Your patch looks good. The patch raises a couple of questions for me. - Security providers are normally configured at the JVM level. - Patches that change one of 5 connectors usually mean the other connectors need changing too - There are other p

Re: Enhancement to set security-provider within AjpAprProcessor

2011-03-07 Thread Konstantin Kolinko
Your patch looks good. Could you please create an issue in Bugzilla and attach the patch there? What Tomcat version are you using? Do you expect it in Tomcat 7 or in some previous version? https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/ http://tomcat.apache.org/bugreport.html#Patches_and_enhancement_requests

Enhancement to set security-provider within AjpAprProcessor

2011-03-07 Thread pkn...@mtg.de
Hello, we need support of X.509 certificates using elliptic curves for client-auth within an servlet-application. The certificates we use are coded using DomainParameters within the PublicKey object. When using the sun-jdk this will lead to an error because the sun-jce implementation only suppo