Mailing-List: contact derby-dev-help@db.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: <derby-dev@db.apache.org>
Message-ID: <24432006.1170784814364.JavaMail.jira@brutus>
Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2007 10:00:14 -0800 (PST)
From: "Daniel John Debrunner (JIRA)" <jira@apache.org>
To: derby-dev@db.apache.org
Subject: [jira] Commented: (DERBY-2196) Run standalone network server with
 security manager by default
In-Reply-To: <4216116.1166553920991.JavaMail.jira@brutus>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-2196?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12470675 ] 

Daniel John Debrunner commented on DERBY-2196:
----------------------------------------------

The codebases can also be properties, look at the policy file for the test harness.

Yes I mean a security subdirectory in the release directory, but it could be done other ways, a example in the documentation that could be cut & pasted might be enough. The expectation is the file is going to be modified anyway.

If we do have a security directory I wasn't thinking that the network server would use the file from that location, it might be easier to keep the policy file contained in the network jar file. We don't need to "maintain" such a file in two locations as they can be sourced from the same location during the build. With that a better name for the subdirectory might be "example" or "templates"  or something along those lines.

> Run standalone network server with security manager by default
> --------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: DERBY-2196
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-2196
>             Project: Derby
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Network Server, Security
>            Reporter: Daniel John Debrunner
>         Assigned To: Rick Hillegas
>         Attachments: derby-2196-01-print-01.diff, derby-2196-01-print-02.diff, secureServer.html, secureServer.html, secureServer.html, secureServer.html, secureServer.html
>
>
> From an e-mail discussion:
> ... Derby should match the security  provided by typical client server systems such as DB2, Oracle, etc. I 
> think in this case system/database owners are trusting the database 
> system to ensure that their system cannot be attacked. So maybe if Derby 
> is booted as a standalone server with no security manager involved, it 
> should install one with a default security policy. Thus allowing Derby 
> to use Java security manager to manage system privileges but not 
> requiring everyone to become familiar with them.
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/db-derby-dev/200612.mbox/%3c4582FE67.7040308@apache.org%3e
> I imagine such a policy would allow any access to databases under derby.system.home and/or user.home.
> By standalone I mean the network server was started though the main() method (command line).

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.