db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Rick Hillegas (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] Closed: (DERBY-3491) Change SystemPermission to be a two arguement permission with a name (object the permission is on) and an action.
Date Tue, 10 Jun 2008 19:25:45 GMT

     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-3491?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]

Rick Hillegas closed DERBY-3491.
--------------------------------

    Resolution: Fixed

> Change SystemPermission to be a two arguement permission with a name (object the permission
is on) and an action.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: DERBY-3491
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-3491
>             Project: Derby
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Security
>            Reporter: Daniel John Debrunner
>            Assignee: Daniel John Debrunner
>         Attachments: d3491_v01_diff.txt
>
>
> With the additional system permissions proposed in DERBY-3462 I wonder if it makes sense
to change the style of names & actions in SystemPermission.
> Today a "shutdown" name is proposed and potential for future "shutdownEngine" and "shutdownServer"
with no actions.
> DERBY-3462 is proposing names of jmxControl, serverControl, engineControl etc also with
no actions.
> Looking at the standard Permission class it seems the name is meant to represent an object
that the permission applies to and action represent actions on that object.
> Thus it would seem to make more sense and be consistent with other Permissions to have:
>  name=server action=control | monitor | shutdown
>  name=engine action=control | monitor | shutdown
>  name=jmx action=control

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


Mime
View raw message