camel-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From jliu <>
Subject Re: Camel security
Date Fri, 02 Apr 2010 05:38:25 GMT

Claus Ibsen-2 wrote:
> Its important that we do this in a manner so the security framework of
> choice can easily be plugged in, as many have different needs.
> And some are forced to use JAAS etc.
> So it should NOT be a Spring Security that master how we do this in Camel. 


 Ideally the Camel security will be pluggable, so that ppl can plug
different security implementations into Camel. For example, for Drools
project, I may want to use Picketlink ( as
the underlying authentication and authorization implementation. Other people
may prefer Spring security or their own implementations.

If we dig into technical details a little bit, I believe the authentication
part should be straightforward. As long as JAAS is used, different
authentication implementations can always be plugged in easily. The headache
part is the authorization. There is no standard we can use in this area, and
I am not sure how easy it is to write a framework that can plug in different
authorization implementations. For example, it may not be possible to write
an authorization framework that is flexible enough to switch its underlying
impl among Picketlink Authz ( and
the authorization part in Seam3 Security
( and the
authorization part in Spring security. Mostly likely Camel will have to come
out with its own specific authorization implementation or just choose an
existing one. 

View this message in context:
Sent from the Camel - Users mailing list archive at

View raw message