t) make the changes described in the latest attachment to
> SOLR-8326? Or would it be more advisable just to wait for 5.4? I don't know
> what may be involved in compiling a new solr.war from the source code.
>
> Thanks again
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Erick Erickson [
escribed in the latest attachment to
> SOLR-8326? Or would it be more advisable just to wait for 5.4? I don't know
> what may be involved in compiling a new solr.war from the source code.
>
> Thanks again
>
> -Original Message-----
> From: Erick Erickson [mailto:erickerick...@
involved in compiling a new solr.war from the source code.
Thanks again
-Original Message-
From: Erick Erickson [mailto:erickerick...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2015 1:25 PM
To: solr-user
Subject: Re: Re:Re: Implementing security.json is breaking ADDREPLICA
bq: I don't
5.4?
>
>
> Thanks again
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Anshum Gupta [mailto:ans...@anshumgupta.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2015 12:31 PM
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Re:Re: Implementing security.json is breaking ADDREPLICA
>
> Yes, it cer
java:266)
> at
> org.apache.solr.common.util.ExecutorUtil$MDCAwareThreadPoolExecutor$1.run(ExecutorUtil.java:210)
> at
> java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1142)
> at
> java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(
266)
> at
> org.apache.solr.common.util.ExecutorUtil$MDCAwareThreadPoolExecutor$1.run(ExecutorUtil.java:210)
> at
> java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1142)
> at
> java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPool
r$1.run(ExecutorUtil.java:210)
at
java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1142)
at
java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:617)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745)
-Original Message-----
From: Anshum Gupta [mail
at
>> org.eclipse.jetty.util.thread.QueuedThreadPool$3.run(QueuedThreadPool.java:555)
>> at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745)
>>
>> In this case the string is just "r?", but usually it is a longer string
>> of control characters.
>>
>> If I
gt; If I shutdown _both_ nodes and restart _one_, and then allow it to be
> "Waiting until we see more replicas up" until it recognizes itself as
> leader, and _then_ restart the other node -- in this case it successfully
> starts.
>
> Is there some necessary environment twe
symptoms seem similar whether
I use the security.json from SOLR-8326 or the security.json from the Wiki (with
the comma repositioned).
-Original Message-
From: Oakley, Craig (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [C]
Sent: Friday, November 20, 2015 6:59 PM
To: 'solr-user@lucene.apache.org'
Subject
tion":{
"class":"solr.RuleBasedAuthorizationPlugin",
"permissions":[{"name":"security-edit",
"role":"admin"}]
"user-role":{"solr":"admin"},
}}
-Original Message-
From: Ansh
FSUpdateLog{state=BUFFERING, tlog=null}
> > ERROR - 2015-11-20 16:56:25.293; [c:xmpl3 s:shard1 r:core_node2
> > x:xmpl3_shard1_replica2] org.apache.solr.cloud.RecoveryStrategy; Recovery
> > failed - trying again... (2)
> > INFO - 2015-11-20 16:56:25.293; [c:xmpl3 s:shard1 r:cor
a.net]
Sent: Friday, November 20, 2015 1:31 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Re:Re: Implementing security.json is breaking ADDREPLICA
Collections API were available before November of 2014, if that is when you
took the class. However, it was only with Solr 5.0 (released in Feb 2015)
that the only
"solruser":"VgZX1TAMNHT2IJikoGdKtxQdXc+MbNwfqzf89YqcLEE=
> > 37pPWQ9v4gciIKHuTmFmN0Rv66rnlMOFEWfEy9qjJfY="},
> > "":{"v":9}},
> > "authorization":{
> > "class":"solr.RuleBasedAuthorizationPlugin",
DDREPLICA _will_ work with security.json already in place?
-Original Message-
From: Anshum Gupta [mailto:ans...@anshumgupta.net]
Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2015 3:44 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Re:Re: Implementing security.json is breaking ADDREPLICA
I'll try
t;name":"security-edit",
>> "role":"admin"},
>> {
>> "name":"xmpl_admin",
>> "collection":"xmpl",
>> "path":"/admin/*",
>> "role&qu
"collection":"xmpl",
> "path":"/select/*",
> "role":null},
> {
> "name":"all-admin",
> "collection":null,
> "path":"/*",
> "role":"xmplgen"},
> {
> "name":"all-core-handlers",
> "path":"/*",
> "role":"xmplgen"}],
> "":{"v":42}}}
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Oakley, Craig (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [C]
> Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2015 1:46 PM
> To: 'solr-user@lucene.apache.org'
> Subject: RE: Re:Re: Implementing security.json is breaking ADDREPLICA
>
> I note that the thread called "Security Problems" (most recent post by
> Nobel Paul) seems like it may help with much of what I'm trying to do. I
> will see to what extent that may help.
>
--
Anshum Gupta
"role":"xmpladmin"},
{
"name":"xmpl_sel",
"collection":"xmpl",
"path":"/select/*",
"role":null},
{
"name":"all-admin",
"
I note that the thread called "Security Problems" (most recent post by Nobel
Paul) seems like it may help with much of what I'm trying to do. I will see to
what extent that may help.
Thank you for the reply.
What we are attempting is to require a password for practically everything, so
that even were a hacker to get within the firewall, they would have limited
access to the various services (the Security team even complained that, for
Solr 4.5 servers, attempts to access ho
Hi Anshum,
I encounter the same problem after I config my security.json like this:
{ "authentication":{
"class":"solr.BasicAuthPlugin",
"credentials":{"solr":"IV0EHq1OnNrj6gvRCwvFwTrZ1+z1oBbnQdiVC3otuq0=
Ndd7LKvVBAaZIF0QAVi1ekCfAJXr1GGfLtRUXhgrF8c="}},
"authorization":{
"class":"solr
21 matches
Mail list logo
