permissions for temporary queues

["Dondorp, Erwin" <er...@cgi.com.INVALID>]

Hello,

A namespace exists for temporary queues so that address-settings can be applied to temporary queues.
That namespace is configured using configuration parameter "temporary-queue-namespace".

In my setup, the security-settings are applied to very specific patterns/prefixes only, so that no user has permissions on "#".
When my observation is correct, creating temporary queues always fails unless "createNonDurableQueue" is granted to "#".
But that contradicts my careful organisation of permissions.

I tried to configure security-settings using the value from temporary-queue-namespace, but that seemed ineffective.

My suspicion is that temporary-queue-namespace is only used for address-settings, but not for security-settings.
Is that suspicion correct?
And, if so, is that really intended?

thx,
Erwin

RE: permissions for temporary queues

["Dondorp, Erwin" <er...@cgi.com.INVALID>]

Domenico,

Thanks for finding that one. Obviously, it has my vote now.
And I'm glad that I can stop searching and experimenting for this...

e.

-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: Domenico Francesco Bruscino <br...@gmail.com> 
Verzonden: donderdag 19 mei 2022 11:41
Aan: users@activemq.apache.org
Onderwerp: Re: permissions for temporary queues


EXTERNAL SENDER:   Do not click any links or open any attachments unless you trust the sender and know the content is safe.
EXPÉDITEUR EXTERNE:    Ne cliquez sur aucun lien et n’ouvrez aucune pièce jointe à moins qu’ils ne proviennent d’un expéditeur fiable, ou que vous ayez l'assurance que le contenu provient d'une source sûre.

Hi Erwin,

your suspicion is right, the temporary-queue-namespace is only used for address-settings, but not for security-settings, see ARTEMIS-3692 [1].

[1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARTEMIS-3692__;!!AaIhyw!sndbMKxDclJf5TC3NBldW-MteNPbg8-5eEEo-4lWT97jH_39lr7eSQcmgxq1E4GPy6KMekVlLkBkCAG25FsN$ 

Regards,
Domenico

On Thu, 19 May 2022 at 11:27, Dondorp, Erwin <er...@cgi.com.invalid>
wrote:

> Hello,
>
> A namespace exists for temporary queues so that address-settings can 
> be applied to temporary queues.
> That namespace is configured using configuration parameter 
> "temporary-queue-namespace".
>
> In my setup, the security-settings are applied to very specific 
> patterns/prefixes only, so that no user has permissions on "#".
> When my observation is correct, creating temporary queues always fails 
> unless "createNonDurableQueue" is granted to "#".
> But that contradicts my careful organisation of permissions.
>
> I tried to configure security-settings using the value from 
> temporary-queue-namespace, but that seemed ineffective.
>
> My suspicion is that temporary-queue-namespace is only used for 
> address-settings, but not for security-settings.
> Is that suspicion correct?
> And, if so, is that really intended?
>
> thx,
> Erwin
>

Re: permissions for temporary queues

[Domenico Francesco Bruscino <br...@gmail.com>]

Hi Erwin,

your suspicion is right, the temporary-queue-namespace is only used for
address-settings, but not for security-settings, see ARTEMIS-3692 [1].

[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARTEMIS-3692

Regards,
Domenico

On Thu, 19 May 2022 at 11:27, Dondorp, Erwin <er...@cgi.com.invalid>
wrote:

> Hello,
>
> A namespace exists for temporary queues so that address-settings can be
> applied to temporary queues.
> That namespace is configured using configuration parameter
> "temporary-queue-namespace".
>
> In my setup, the security-settings are applied to very specific
> patterns/prefixes only, so that no user has permissions on "#".
> When my observation is correct, creating temporary queues always fails
> unless "createNonDurableQueue" is granted to "#".
> But that contradicts my careful organisation of permissions.
>
> I tried to configure security-settings using the value from
> temporary-queue-namespace, but that seemed ineffective.
>
> My suspicion is that temporary-queue-namespace is only used for
> address-settings, but not for security-settings.
> Is that suspicion correct?
> And, if so, is that really intended?
>
> thx,
> Erwin
>