On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 10:40 PM, Bill Burke <bburke_at_redhat.com> wrote:
> @RolesAllowed should just be required to support. But, I stress again,
> @RolesAllowed is just half of the problem...
>
I take it you're referring to this here:
nor does it define a way to specify an authentication protocol (BASIC,
> FORM, CERT, SAML, OIDC, etc.). So, you end up still having to define
> security constraints and login config within web.xml.
Since JAX-RS is layered on top of Servlets, I'm eager to learn why defining
the authentication mechanism in web.xml would presumably not be good enough.
Note that there's also a programmatic variant to register an equivalent to
what you can specify in web.xml via the AuthConfigFactory. In JSR 375 we're
adding another variant of that based on CDI and annotations.
For an example see here:
https://github.com/javaee-security-spec/soteria/blob/master/test/app-mem-basic/src/main/java/test/Servlet.java#L17
These work quite well with JAX-RS. For an earlier prototype see e.g. this
article:
http://arjan-tijms.omnifaces.org/2014/11/header-based-stateless-token.html
We're using something quite close to that in practice for the API of
zeef.com.
Kind regards,
Arjan Tijms
>
> BTW, IMO, the NIO and SSE stuff is borderline a waste of effort both for
> the spec lead and for us implementers that have to suffer the TCK. I just
> don't think you'll have a lot of people using either feature... Let the
> flames begin.
>
>
> On 3/3/2016 12:39 PM, markus_at_headcrashing.eu wrote:
>
>> As time is scarce and manpower is not for free, my proposal was to simply
>> define a default API for the implementations we actually have in the
>> products already. It would make ISVs lives much easier if we don't have to
>> add container-specific enablers.
>>
>> Zitat von Sergey Beryozkin <sberyozkin_at_talend.com>:
>>
>> Markus, I was only referring to Bill's idea that it would be good to have
>>> some standard way to do Basic Auth/etc.
>>> I'm not sure how far/if at all we can go about supporting @RolesAllowed
>>> in 2.1 - there are pieces of work to be done around the proposed NIO/etc
>>> API improvements (proposed by the spec leads), minor items proposed by us,
>>> and here I'd indeed support having something standard, loosely typed
>>> authentication API introduced given that indeed Basic Auth is only one of
>>> several options these days.
>>>
>>> @RolesAllowed is similar to Basic Auth, it is kind of outdated really,
>>> and other forms of the access control should be taken into the
>>> consideration, it was proposed by one of experts/users before that @Scopes
>>> (OAuth2 access token related) get introduced, etc.
>>>
>>> Sergey
>>> On 02/03/16 18:58, markus_at_headcrashing.eu wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> May I interpret you answer as "Yes, JAX-RS 2.1 MUST specify a common
>>>> way to enable @RolesAllowed, and CXF will implement it ASAP"?
>>>>
>>>> Zitat von Sergey Beryozkin <sberyozkin_at_talend.com>:
>>>>
>>>> On 01/03/16 18:11, Bill Burke wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I'd like to see some clarification on this too. If your jax-rs
>>>>>> service is an EJB, I believe the spec says @RolesAllowed is supposed to be
>>>>>> honoured, but JAX-RS has no other annotations to define things like
>>>>>> transport requirements (Is SSL required), nor does it define a way to
>>>>>> specify an authentication protocol (BASIC, FORM, CERT, SAML, OIDC, etc.).
>>>>>> So, you end up still having to define security constraints and login config
>>>>>> within web.xml.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Security is very undefined on the client. There's no standard way of
>>>>>> doing BASIC auth. BASIC auth still seems to be used even though OAuth and
>>>>>> other token based architectures are starting to be prevelant.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The users start driving it :-), opened few minutes ago
>>>>>
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-6817
>>>>>
>>>>> The only standard way I know of is to create an Authorization header
>>>>> manually and set it on the target
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers, Sergey
>>>>>
>>>>> On 3/1/2016 12:28 PM, markus_at_headcrashing.eu wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Experts,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I hope you're in the mood for another small spec clarification in
>>>>>>> the hope to further align Jersey, WebSphere, CXF and RestEasy. :-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The current Jersey manual says that it will respect role-based
>>>>>>> security annotations (@PermitAll, @DenyAll, @RolesAllowd; according to JSR
>>>>>>> 250 "Common Annotations for the Java Platform") as soon as a
>>>>>>> Jersey-specific filter is EXPLICITLY enabled by means of JAX-RS feature
>>>>>>> config API. If I understood the WebSphere manual correctly, I respects
>>>>>>> these annotations BY DEFAULT. According chapter 36 of its manual, it seems
>>>>>>> as if RESTeasy wants EXPLICIT enabling by Servlet web.xml. CXF on the other
>>>>>>> hand apparantly wants the deployer to enable an interceptor EXPLICITLY. So
>>>>>>> all those JAX-RS products process these annotations, but each has a
>>>>>>> different way to enable it. Looking through the eyes of an ISV, this is
>>>>>>> real pain-in-the-* since security is a must-have in all non-trivial
>>>>>>> products and nobody wants to provide four different configs for the same
>>>>>>> off-the-shelf app.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'd like to suggest that the spec 2.1 defines ONE COMMON way which
>>>>>>> enables security on ALL JAX-RS products.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have two proposals:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (a) Enable it by default. It should not do any real harm regarding
>>>>>>> backwards compatibility. This way, nobody has to worry about security
>>>>>>> besides adding above role annotations.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (b) Enable it explicitly by adding @Secured on the Application
>>>>>>> class. I think this is ugly as the existence of above annotations already
>>>>>>> imply that security is wanted.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As all products already support the functionality, we just need to
>>>>>>> agree upon a SINGLE way to enable it. I think people simply expect this in
>>>>>>> 2.1.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What do you think?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -Markus
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
> --
> Bill Burke
> JBoss, a division of Red Hat
> http://bill.burkecentral.com
>
>