>-----Original Message----- >From: Stanton Sievers [mailto:[email protected]] >Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2011 2:56 PM >To: [email protected] >Subject: Re: SecurityTokenKeyFile > >I thought the code was backwards compatible. Jesse, did your recent >change remove the securityTokenKeyFile or did I do that by accident when I >made my changes and introduced securityTokenKey?
It was my change that removed the securityTokenKeyFile property entirely in favor of the one more flexible securityTokenKey property. Since we'd said previously that 2.x to 3.x could introduce breaking changes, and since we haven't actually done a full 3.x release yet I thought it would be alright to go ahead and cleanup the config and remove the old property. Would an entry in the UPGRADING file for this property name change suffice? I'd really rather keep the configuration clean if we can... >Thanks, >-Stanton > > > >From: Henry Saputra <[email protected]> >To: [email protected], >Date: 11/22/2011 14:51 >Subject: Re: SecurityTokenKeyFile > > > >Thanks Jesse, > >Hmm maybe we should add code for old config compatibility for 3.0? >Need to also check for "securityTokenKeyFile" config. > >Stanton, Ryan? > >- Henry > >On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 11:42 AM, daviesd <[email protected]> wrote: >> Ah, I didn't catch that. Sorry. Yes, changing to just securityTokenKey >> works. Thanks a lot! >> >> doug >> >> >> On 11/22/11 2:36 PM, "Ciancetta, Jesse E." <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Ciancetta, Jesse E. >>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2011 2:24 PM >>>> To: shindig >>>> Subject: RE: SecurityTokenKeyFile >>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: daviesd [mailto:[email protected]] >>>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2011 2:14 PM >>>>> To: shindig >>>>> Subject: SecurityTokenKeyFile >>>>> >>>>> I know there was a change recently (SHINDIG-1636) that changed the >way >>>> the >>>>> token encryption key was loaded. I use to have >>>>> >>>>> "gadgets.securityTokenKeyFile" : "res://tokenkey.txt" >>>> >>>> Hmm -- I believe this should have worked and I tested this case when I >was >>>> testing the recent changes you referred to locally. I'll give it >another try >>>> in a >>>> few minutes and report back what I find... >>> >>> Actually -- sorry -- that wouldn't have worked. The property name >changed to >>> just gadgets.securityTokenKey as you mentioned below but now that one >property >>> can be configured using either the key directly, a resource reference >or a >>> file-system reference. The default container.js should have samples of >the >>> three different ways it can be used now -- so for loading from the >classpath >>> it should be: >>> >>> "gadgets.securityTokenKey" : "res:// tokenkey.txt ", >>> >>> That actually applies to any property in container.js now -- not just >the >>> security token key (the ability to pull the value from a classpath >resource or >>> file-system reference that is). >>> >>> Please let me know if this resolves the issue for you. >>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> But this appears to be broken now. tokenkey.txt would be in the root >of my >>>>> classes directory. I was able to get this to work by providing the >key >>>>> directly >>>>> >>>>> "gadgets.securityTokenKey" : "xxxxxxxxxx=" >>>>> >>>>> What is the correct way to refer to the file now? >>>>> >>>>> Doug >>> >> >> >> > > >
