Github user clebertsuconic commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/701#discussion_r73435791
--- Diff:
artemis-server/src/main/java/org/apache/activemq/artemis/core/server/impl/ServerSessionImpl.java
---
@@ -420,10 +420,20 @@ public ServerConsumer createConsumer(final long
consumerID,
}
if (browseOnly) {
- securityCheck(binding.getAddress(), CheckType.BROWSE, this);
+ try {
+ securityCheck(binding.getAddress(), CheckType.BROWSE, this);
+ }
+ catch (Exception e) {
+
securityCheck(binding.getAddress().concat(".").concat(queueName),
CheckType.BROWSE, this);
--- End diff --
I agree with concatenating the address with the queueName, as long as is
documented and would make sense for users.
I'm a bit confused on why you would need to catch the exception and redo
the verification. I would think you would need the opposite.. in case it
passed? In case the address verification failed.
I guess I don't fully understand the use case. we should talk through IRC
so we can interact a bit better.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at [email protected] or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
