hi Konrad,

it seems we got at least one other opinion….

regards

antonio

On May 10, 2017, at 3:50 PM, Konrad Windszus <konra...@gmx.de> wrote:

> I am not sure either, I would like to hear the opinions of some other Sling 
> committers on this.
> Konrad
> 
>> On 10. May 2017, at 14:25, Antonio Sanso <asa...@adobe.com.INVALID> wrote:
>> 
>> hi Konrad
>> 
>> On May 10, 2017, at 2:16 PM, Konrad Windszus <konra...@gmx.de> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Antonio,
>>> Sorry for the confusion, I was wrongly assuming that you fixed my original 
>>> concern without checking further in the code.
>>> But in fact there are still unexpected corner cases which cover the wrong 
>>> nodes (see my last comments in SLING-6053).
>>> 
>>> Not sure how to proceed here, but the previous mechanism of prefix path 
>>> matching was at least easy to describe, although kind of unexpected. Now 
>>> the more sophisticated matching gives the wrong certainty that you can now 
>>> easily restrict authentication to certain resource paths (and children) 
>>> which is not the case because the mechanism still only relies on request 
>>> paths only (and not on resource paths).
>> 
>> this new mechanism it might be a bit more difficult to describe (nothing 
>> that a good documentation can’t do though) but for sure it will not 
>> introduce new corner case. What it will do it is actually managing better 
>> some of the old corner cases (reducing the number of mistakes)
>> 
>>> 
>>> The cleanest solution would be IMHO to involve the resource resolver there 
>>> already, but I haven't checked the implications.
>> 
>> I agree this is the only clean solution but this will have a considerable 
>> cost. Do we really want to map/resolve at the authentication layer?
>> 
>> regards
>> 
>> antonio
>> 
>>> Konrad
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On 10. May 2017, at 14:06, Antonio Sanso <asa...@adobe.com.INVALID> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> hi Konrad,
>>>> 
>>>> I am confused now since you were in favor for it in the first place … 
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SLING-6053?focusedCommentId=16000473&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-16000473
>>>> 
>>>> regards
>>>> 
>>>> antonio
>>>> 
>>>> On May 10, 2017, at 11:21 AM, Konrad Windszus <konra...@gmx.de> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Sorry for insisting on it, but I am still not 100% convinced the patch 
>>>>> for SLING-6053 works correctly.
>>>>> See my comment in 
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SLING-6053?focusedCommentId=16004357&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-16004357.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The general problem is that in Sling you cannot uniquely extract the 
>>>>> resource path from a given url (because resource names may contain "." as 
>>>>> well).
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Konrad
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 10. May 2017, at 11:04, Antonio Sanso <asa...@adobe.com.INVALID> 
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> We solved 1 issue in this release:
>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SLING-6053
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Staging repository:
>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachesling-1716/
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> You can use this UNIX script to download the release and verify the 
>>>>>> signatures:
>>>>>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/sling/trunk/check_staged_release.sh
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Usage:
>>>>>> sh check_staged_release.sh 1716 /tmp/sling-staging
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Please vote to approve this release:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> [ ] +1 Approve the release
>>>>>> [ ]  0 Don't care
>>>>>> [ ] -1 Don't release, because ...
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> This majority vote is open for at least 72 hours.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 

Reply via email to