river-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Brouwer <mark.brou...@cheiron.org>
Subject Re: Extending semantics for DynamicPolicy
Date Mon, 04 Jun 2007 19:54:16 GMT
Michael Warres wrote:
> Quoting Mark Brouwer <mark.brouwer@cheiron.org>:
>> However there is one hurdle I can't seem to take [1] and that is
>> dynamically assigning permissions the the protection domains associated
>> with the class loaders due to the fact that Dynamicpolicy doesn't
>> provide a method in which you could pass in a class loader, all methods
>> take a class as argument. The funny thing is though that the semantics
>> for this methods make it clear the permissions are really assigned to
>> the protection domains associated with the class loader [2] for the
>> class passed in. The actual DynamicPolicy provider implementation also
>> indicates that there seems to be no reason why the DynamicPolicy
>> interface can't support passing in a class loader.
> FWIW, the API was fashioned this way since a caller might not have permission
> to obtain the class loader of the class to which it wished to grant
> permissions.  IIRC, I don't think there was anything intrinsically wrong with
> passing in a class loader directly--there simply wasn't any use case at the
> time to justify an additional method.

Hi Michael,

Forgot to respond on Vinod's posting mentioning that I'm aware why the
API is as it is, logical given its purpose of proxy preparation. I don't
know whether we should pursue the enhancements I first mentioned as
Vinod's 'trick' makes it possible to get what you want and probably it
will stay a rare use case, but if other feel different about this I have
no problem in creating an issue for it.

View raw message