Re: New security implementation

 > Bordet, Simone wrote:
 >
 > Hi Luis,
 >
 > many thanks for this clarification.
 >
 > Although I feel doing like you say is more correct, I cannot
 > really find a definitive motivation.
 >
 > Can you please expand on *why* should be like you say ?

Hi Simon,

The idea behind all this was to simplify the way permission checks were
carried out with regards to the codebase starting the server versus the
authenticated principal (and the delegate principals).

If we want to start a connector server with the minimum rights then
the best thing is to just allow the connector server to authenticate
the identities that connect directly to it, i.e. the authenticated
identitites, and let the ones that can connect indirectly to it,
i.e. the delegate identities, to be controlled by the Subject Delegation
permission required in the authenticated principal grant clause. This
avoids duplicating things in the policy files.

There´s also a slight semantic difference between your implementation 
and my implementation although it does not compromise the connector
server´s security:

In my implementation the delegate identity can only connect through
the connection opened by the authenticated identity whereas in your
implementation you let the delegate connect directly to the server.

Regards,
Luis



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: IT Product Guide on ITManagersJournal
Use IT products in your business? Tell us what you think of them. Give us
Your Opinions, Get Free ThinkGeek Gift Certificates! Click to find out more
http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/guidepromo.tmpl