Thanks for creating the request; what you did sounds fine. Tim
On Thu, Mar 29, 2018, 11:31 AM Quinn Stevenson <qu...@pronoia-solutions.com> wrote: > Thanks for all your help Tim. > > I created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-6941 < > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-6941> for this request, and I > put a link to the example implementation in the JIRA rather than the > source. I did it that way because the jar with the plugin is in Maven > Central, and the source can be found on Github. > > I’ll be moving this customer to Artemis in the near future - I guess I’ll > have to look at doing the same thing in Artemis. > > Thanks Again > > > > On Mar 27, 2018, at 7:12 AM, Tim Bain <tb...@alumni.duke.edu> wrote: > > > > Quinn, > > > > Great, I'm glad you got it working. > > > > Yes, I think there would be benefit to having this capability. However, > I'm > > not sure if what you've implemented is the ideal implementation from a > > long-term maintenance standpoint (I suspect that we'd want to fold it > into > > the Simple Authentication Plugin, with configuration options to turn it > on > > and off and possibly a way to specify the set of protocols that do not > > require authentication), so I suggest you create an enhancement request > in > > JIRA and attach your implementation to it. Whoever implements the > > enhancement request can use the core of your code and wrap the > appropriate > > options around it in the Simple Authentication Plugin (or wherever else), > > and anyone who wants the capability before it gets implemented officially > > can grab your plugin file off of the enhancement request. > > > > Tim > > > > On Mon, Mar 26, 2018, 9:48 PM Quinn Stevenson < > qu...@pronoia-solutions.com> > > wrote: > > > >> Thanks Tim - I think I’ve got one working now. > >> > >> I wound up casting the result of getConnector() to TransportConnector > and > >> then calling getName() - it looks like it has what I need. > >> > >> I’ve got a version running locally now, and it seems to be doing what > I’m > >> after. Thanks for all of your help. > >> > >> BTW - let me know if you think this is something the community would > like > >> and I’ll put together a PR for it. > >> > >> Thanks Again > >> Quinn > >> > >>> On Mar 25, 2018, at 11:11 PM, Tim Bain <tb...@alumni.duke.edu> wrote: > >>> > >>> Quinn, > >>> > >>> I think you should be able to access the URI to which the connection is > >>> bound by calling > >>> > ((TransportConnector)context.getConnector()).getServer().getConnectURI(), > >>> and then you can parse the protocol out of it. But it's not something > >> I've > >>> personally done and I don't have time to try it right now, so this is > >>> purely conjecture based on the documentation plus reading the code. So > if > >>> that doesn't work, I apologize, but let me know how it blows up and I > can > >>> try to help further. > >>> > >>> Tim > >>> > >>> On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 10:22 AM, Quinn Stevenson < > >>> qu...@pronoia-solutions.com> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Thank you Tim - > >>>> > >>>> I was afraid you were going to say that :-) > >>>> > >>>> I was looking at the SimpleAuthenticationPlugin / > >>>> SimpleAuthenticationBroker, and I have an idea how to do this. The > one > >>>> thing I’m not sure about is how I can tell when the connection is > coming > >>>> via a VM URL - do you have any hints on that? > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> On Mar 21, 2018, at 7:21 PM, Tim Bain <tb...@alumni.duke.edu> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> I'm not sure there's a built-in way to do this without writing any > >> code, > >>>>> but you should be able to write a simple security plugin that allows > >> you > >>>> to > >>>>> allow or deny connections based on their transport and whether they > are > >>>>> anonymous. The bottom of http://activemq.apache.org/security.html > has > >>>>> details about how to get started. > >>>>> > >>>>> Tim > >>>>> > >>>>> On Wed, Mar 21, 2018, 6:08 PM Quinn Stevenson < > >>>> qu...@pronoia-solutions.com> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> I have several components running inside the same JVM as ActiveMQ, > and > >>>>>> they connect to the broker using a vm URL. Guest access to the > broker > >>>> has > >>>>>> been disabled for security reasons, but I’d like the embedded > >>>> components to > >>>>>> be able to connect to the broker without a username or password. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Is there a way to configure ActiveMQ to allow anonymous/guest access > >> for > >>>>>> VM connections only? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >> > >> > >
