mina-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Guillaume Nodet <gno...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: symmetry of pluggable authentication classes?
Date Fri, 13 Nov 2009 17:08:32 GMT
Yeah, it may make more sense to always return a boolean then.  Wdyt ?

Btw, I've done quite a bit of refactoring on the shell / commands
interfaces, so it will break any existing app (though the changes are
quite easy to do).

On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 16:00, Shawn Pearce <sop@google.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 11:27, Daniel Kahn Gillmor
> <dkg@fifthhorseman.net> wrote:
>>
>>  http://mina.apache.org/sshd/configuring-security.html
>>
>> Also, should either authenticator do anything with the ServerSession
>> object passed in?  There does not seem to be any comment about that
>> parameter in the interface file.
>
> The ServerSession parameter is there so the authenticator can attach
> session attributes via setAttribute(AttributeKey<T> key).  E.g. one of
> my applications uses this to attach the application specific object
> which represents a user and what they are permitted to access once the
> session has been established.  This is later then available to the
> CommandFactory, and can be given to any Command implementations it
> constructs.
>
> But if all you care about is yes-allow/no-deny, the parameter doesn't
> need to be used.
>



-- 
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
------------------------
Open Source SOA
http://fusesource.com

Mime
View raw message