Bug 1035385 - Repair Principals definitions of Security Policy elements in Security Manager section of Security Guide
Summary: Repair Principals definitions of Security Policy elements in Security Manager...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: JBoss Enterprise Application Platform 6
Classification: JBoss
Component: Documentation
Version: 6.2.0
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
medium
Target Milestone: GA
: EAP 6.2.2
Assignee: Tom WELLS
QA Contact: Ondrej Lukas
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: 1035353
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2013-11-27 16:12 UTC by FIlip Bogyai
Modified: 2015-12-01 05:53 UTC (History)
5 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Enhancement
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
: 1090315 (view as bug list)
Environment:
Build Name: 14876, Security Guide-6.2-1 Build Date: 27-11-2013 14:15:01 Topic ID: 4782-552816 [Latest]
Last Closed: 2014-06-02 12:50:22 UTC
Type: Bug

Attachments (Terms of Use)
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Description FIlip Bogyai 2013-11-27 16:12:53 UTC 
In 5.4. Write a Java Security Manager Policy in Basic Information in definition of Principals element configuration there is "If it is omitted, it signifies "any principals"." - I understand this expression in way that
Comment 1 Ondrej Lukas 2013-11-28 06:08:58 UTC 
Description of this bz doesn't have any sense, right description is following:

In 5.4. Write a Java Security Manager Policy in Basic Information in definition of Principals element configuration there is "If it is omitted, it signifies "any principals"." - I understand this expression in way that in executing thread must be at least one "any" Principal. I think that this should be better and  understandable "If it is omitted, it means Principals of executing thread have no impact on the Java Security Manager".

Also in "Basic Information" should be mentioned that definitions are connected to policytool - because some of them are incorrect for pure text Security Policy File.
Comment 4 Josef Cacek 2014-04-23 06:53:59 UTC 
Verified on stage - Revision 6.2.2-6
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.