river-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dennis Reedy <dennis.re...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Towards Internet Jini Services (trust)
Date Tue, 05 Oct 2010 23:38:43 GMT

On Oct 5, 2010, at 1000AM, Sim IJskes - QCG wrote:

> On 10/05/2010 03:48 PM, Dennis Reedy wrote:
>> Just curious here, what if the decision was that you can only load
>> classes locally? That in order to get your classes you had to first
>> download the jars from a (trusted) server (perhaps even prompting the
>> user to accept the download?). You would verify the authenticity of
>> those jars before creating a classloader to load the required
>> classes. If you already have the jars (locally) necessary, why
>> download them again?
> That would be my preferred way of security, matching practices already there. Signed
jars, downloaded with webstart, and communicating over jini.
>> Consider you already have the service's interface (and any other
>> supporting classes) in your classpath to begin with (which is loaded
>> locally), why not provision the remote service's proxy jars first
>> before connecting to the service? Appropriate handshaking happens to
>> connect to the remote service of course, but do you take the dynamic
>> insecure class loading out of the equation this way?
> Yep.
> But i got the feeling that others within the river community still want to maintain the
same 'code agility', as deployment on a lan.

I'm not sure that this approach impedes one bit on perceived 'code agility'. If anything it
removes the troublesome issues that surround code servers, missing codebases and performance
issues of constantly loading resources over the wire that (most likely) have been downloaded
at some time in the past.

We had discussed this at great length (just about the length of this thread:)) back in May.
Check out the "Codebase Service" thread for details.


View raw message