users@javaee-security-spec.java.net

[javaee-security-spec users] [jsr375-experts] Re: 2-TerminologyUserVsCaller ACTION: cast vote

From: Ivar Grimstad <ivar.grimstad_at_gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 07:11:47 +0000

Hi,

I'm fine with both, but give my vote to *caller*.

ivar

On Sat, Jun 20, 2015 at 6:30 PM Rudy De Busscher <rdebusscher_at_gmail.com>
wrote:

> Arjan,
>
> *Caller* for me, as User refers to much to a human on the other side (and
> we have also processes)
>
> regards
> Rudy
>
> On 18 June 2015 at 23:28, arjan tijms <arjan.tijms_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Another concept for which there are different terms in use is what we
>> often call using simple language the "logged-in user", and with some more
>> formal language sometimes the "authenticated/authentication identity".
>>
>> Next to the logged-in/authentication user/identity, there's another
>> variant; the run-as user/identity.
>>
>> In Java EE there's one extra step even. Various API methods return a
>> single principal from the user/identity called the "user principal" or the
>> "caller principal".
>>
>> To put these terms somewhat in context, consider the following sentence
>> from the JASPIC spec, B.1:
>>
>> "When the authentication identity is provided to the container as a bag
>> of principals in a Subject, the container needs some way to recognize which
>> of the principals in the subject should be returned as the caller or user
>> Principal."
>>
>> Now it's this last term that's specifically problematic in Java EE
>> "caller or user principal".
>> https://java.net/jira/browse/JAVAEE_SECURITY_SPEC-2 shows that various
>> APIs in Java EE use either "caller" or "principal" now.
>>
>> For this issue I'd like to ask you again to vote for a term, or propose a
>> new term. Again, it's a non-binding vote of course and to establish a
>> working term. As the previous vote ran for a long time, I'd like to set
>> this vote to *2 weeks*.
>>
>> The list of terms is currently the following:
>>
>> 1. user (principal)
>> 2. caller (principal)
>> 3. ???
>>
>> Pedro already expressed a preference for "caller" in the issue, which is
>> my preference as well (but consistency is my top concern).
>>
>> So we now have
>>
>> 2 out of 14 voted:
>>
>> Pedro Igor: caller
>> Arjan Tijms: caller
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Arjan Tijms
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>