[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-3491?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Myrna van Lunteren updated DERBY-3491:
--------------------------------------
Fix Version/s: 10.4.1.3
> Change SystemPermission to be a two arguement permission with a name (object
> the permission is on) and an action.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DERBY-3491
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-3491
> Project: Derby
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Security
> Reporter: Daniel John Debrunner
> Assignee: Daniel John Debrunner
> Fix For: 10.4.1.3
>
> Attachments: d3491_v01_diff.txt
>
>
> With the additional system permissions proposed in DERBY-3462 I wonder if it
> makes sense to change the style of names & actions in SystemPermission.
> Today a "shutdown" name is proposed and potential for future "shutdownEngine"
> and "shutdownServer" with no actions.
> DERBY-3462 is proposing names of jmxControl, serverControl, engineControl etc
> also with no actions.
> Looking at the standard Permission class it seems the name is meant to
> represent an object that the permission applies to and action represent
> actions on that object.
> Thus it would seem to make more sense and be consistent with other
> Permissions to have:
> name=server action=control | monitor | shutdown
> name=engine action=control | monitor | shutdown
> name=jmx action=control
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
