Il giorno 10/gen/2013, alle ore 10.01, Francesco Chicchiriccò ha scritto:
> On 09/01/2013 19:37, Denis Signoretto wrote:
>> [...]
>> I agree with Fabio, probably this feature it's not so useful in most of
>> common cases.
>> I was imagining a general use cases where some user attributes, for sec
On 10/01/2013 10:40, ernst Developer wrote:
Hi Francesco,
The list of requirements sounds reasonable. I have another question: where
does Syncope store the encryption key?
Hi Ernst,
for user passwords - and as I wrote below, I am proposing to do the same
with passphrase encryption - the encryp
+1
Agree with Jan. Nice summary :)
Regards.
Denis
> -Messaggio originale-
> Da: Jan Bernhardt [mailto:jbernha...@talend.com]
> Inviato: giovedì 10 gennaio 2013 11:24
> A: dev@syncope.apache.org
> Oggetto: RE: Support for encrypted schema attributes
>
>
for encrypted schema attributes
On 09/01/2013 19:37, Denis Signoretto wrote:
[...]
I agree with Fabio, probably this feature it's not so useful in most of
common cases.
I was imagining a general use cases where some user attributes, for
security reasons or law restrictons, can't
:ilgro...@apache.org]
> Sent: Donnerstag, 10. Januar 2013 10:01
> To: dev@syncope.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Support for encrypted schema attributes
>
> On 09/01/2013 19:37, Denis Signoretto wrote:
> > [...]
> > I agree with Fabio, probably this feature it's not so u
+1
Nice summary!
Regards.
Jan
> -Original Message-
> From: Francesco Chicchiriccò [mailto:ilgro...@apache.org]
> Sent: Donnerstag, 10. Januar 2013 10:01
> To: dev@syncope.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Support for encrypted schema attributes
>
> On 09/01/2013 19:37, D
Hi Francesco,
The list of requirements sounds reasonable. I have another question: where
does Syncope store the encryption key?
Regards,
Ernst
2013/1/10 Francesco Chicchiriccò
> On 09/01/2013 19:37, Denis Signoretto wrote:
>
>> [...]
>> I agree with Fabio, probably this feature it's not so usef
On 09/01/2013 19:37, Denis Signoretto wrote:
[...]
I agree with Fabio, probably this feature it's not so useful in most of common
cases.
I was imagining a general use cases where some user attributes, for security
reasons
or law restrictons, can't be stored cleartext; e.g. a sort of sencondary
