Here are the things I think are important: 1) I shouldn’t have to change my domain classes in order to run a query. 2) I shouldn’t have to configure anything to run a “normal” query that uses classes deployed into the cluster and stored in the region. 3) By default the cluster is secure from malicious users trying to execute untrusted code*.
Anthony * if a user chooses to deploy code into the cluster that does bad things that’s on them > On Jun 25, 2019, at 11:07 AM, Aaron Lindsey <alind...@pivotal.io> wrote: > > +1 to the proposal > > Some comments: > > - There is almost always trade-off between security and ease-of-use. The > proposed implementation of JavaBeanAccessorBasedMethodAuthorizer makes me > feel uneasy because it would be super easy to create a method that begins > with "get" or "is" but is not actually a JavaBean accessor method. However, > I can also see how nice this would be in terms of ease-of-use. > - From a security standpoint I prefer AnnotationBasedMethodAuthorizer > because it's very explicit on which methods may be executed. To remove the > coupling between the configuration and domain classes, you could separate > out the mapping of which methods are allowed into a different class and not > use annotations. > - How have other projects solved this problem? Can we add a "related > work" section to the proposal? If you've already looked and didn't really > find anything relevant you could also mention that in the proposal. > > - Aaron > > > On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 4:31 PM Jason Huynh <jhu...@pivotal.io> wrote: > >> +1 >> >> I have some concerns about all of the different ways we configure geode to >> be secure, but that's a different issue ;-) >> Overall, very thorough proposal Juan! >> >> >> >> On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 4:22 PM Dan Smith <dsm...@pivotal.io> wrote: >> >>> +1 >>> >>> This proposal looks good to me! >>> >>> On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 4:15 PM Udo Kohlmeyer <u...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >>>> +1, Count me in >>>> >>>> On 6/24/19 13:06, Juan José Ramos wrote: >>>>> Hey Jake, >>>>> >>>>> Sure, I guess we could do a live session if there's enough interest >>> after >>>>> people have reviewed the proposal. >>>>> Best regards. >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 4:17 PM Jacob Barrett <jbarr...@pivotal.io> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Jun 24, 2019, at 11:49 AM, Juan José Ramos <jra...@pivotal.io> >>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I’d rather get feedback in any way and aggregate everything on my >>> own >>>>>> than >>>>>>> maybe not getting anything because I'm explicitly limiting the >>> options >>>> to >>>>>>> provide it. >>>>>> Dealers choice so both it is! >>>>>> >>>>>> Could you also consider public live session on some medium, like >> Zoom, >>>>>> where you can walk through the proposal and take like feedback and >>>>>> questions? >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> Jake >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>> >>
