James Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> Neat idea. Perhaps another CacheAccess subclass, or a proxy to an
> arbitrary CacheAccess, which knows how to filter the elements that pass
> through it. Then you could register a filter with that access class to
> encrypt / decrypt items.
>
> My gut feeling is that something like this doesn't belong _in_ the
> cache, but rather as a wrapper. Putting it in the cache would make an
> already confusing (CacheAccess/Cache) set of classes more confusing, and
> add more dependencies, two things I think are already going to be
> barriers to wider adoption of JCS.

I agree with James -- this belongs in a wrapper.  Keeping security out
of JCS will keep the API easy to use.  However, another component
which provides the credential-ed access to JCS functionality that
Aaron describes would definitely be cool.

- Dan

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Reply via email to