Skip to main content
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [es-dev] TCK question on LDAP IDStore
I also demonstrated the LDAP identity store at some conferences but did not look into it so closely otherwise.

What seems a little strange, is that it's mandatory, wonder if we could change that, if not in Jakarta EE 9 then for 10 at the latest, it does not sound appropriate because not every implementing environment may have an LDAP directory.

Kind Regards,

Werner 






On Mon, Jul 6, 2020 at 1:54 PM Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <jeanouii@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
This one also looks weird to be honest


Comment says it's supposed to return NOT_VALIDATED which is fine with me.
But implementation of the test is asserting an exception happens.

Did not try Soteria tests. If you have some pointers, I'm happy to give it a try.

Thanks for the quick response



Le lun. 6 juil. 2020 à 12:03, arjan tijms <arjan.tijms@xxxxxxxxx> a écrit :
Hi,

I wasn’t personally much involved with the LDAP implementations anymore after the initial version, but I think many of the TCK tests were based / inspired on the Soteria tests. 

To cross-check, did you try running the tests in Soteria/tests against your implementation? They are implementation for independent and there already is a TomEE target (you just need to remove Soteria being added to TomEE).

As for the TCK tests itself, they were created by people external to the Java EE Security EG, so might not read along on this list.

On Monday, July 6, 2020, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <jeanouii@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi,

LDAP identity store is required per spec.
I was trying to create an implementation at Apache and I was running the tests.

I am interested in having more information about 
com.sun.ts.tests.securityapi.idstore.ldap.invalidcallerbasedn.Client

@test_Strategy: LdapIdenttiyStore (priority=100) exists, but callerBaseDN
   * property is not correct Then validation is INVALID

All the other invalidXXX seem to expect an exception. Just wanted to know what were the thoughts that led this one to be expecting an INVALID response.

Can someone clarify?

--
Jean-Louis
_______________________________________________
es-dev mailing list
es-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/es-dev


--
Jean-Louis
_______________________________________________
es-dev mailing list
es-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/es-dev

Back to the top