About Question enthuware.oce-ejbd.v6.2.505 :

Moderator: admin

Post Reply
ETS User

About Question enthuware.oce-ejbd.v6.2.505 :

Post by ETS User » Tue Oct 18, 2011 10:07 am

It seems to me that both bean provider and application assembler may provide methode permissions. From the EJB 3.1 spec, section 17.3.2.2:

"The Bean Provider may use the deployment descriptor as an alternative to metadata annotations to spec-
ify the method permissions (or as a means to supplement or override metadata annotations for method
permission values). The application assembler is permitted to override the method permission values
using the bean’s deployment descriptor."

admin
Site Admin
Posts: 8304
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 9:26 pm
Contact:

Re: About Question enthuware.oce-ejbd.v6.2.505 :

Post by admin » Sun Oct 23, 2011 8:37 am

You are right. This has now been updated.

thanks for your feedback!
If you like our products and services, please help us by posting your review here.

krizsan

Re: About Question enthuware.oce-ejbd.v6.2.505 :

Post by krizsan » Mon Nov 21, 2011 1:56 pm

Hi!
Strange, the above seems to indicate that the correct answers should be "bean provider" and "application assembler", yet the program tells me that I have answered incorrectly and the correct answers are "application assembler" and "deployer".
Best wishes!

Guest

Re: About Question enthuware.oce-ejbd.v6.2.505 :

Post by Guest » Fri Nov 25, 2011 5:20 pm

krizsan wrote:Hi!
Strange, the above seems to indicate that the correct answers should be "bean provider" and "application assembler", yet the program tells me that I have answered incorrectly and the correct answers are "application assembler" and "deployer".
Best wishes!
At me too.

admin
Site Admin
Posts: 8304
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 9:26 pm
Contact:

Re: About Question enthuware.oce-ejbd.v6.2.505 :

Post by admin » Sun Nov 27, 2011 8:59 pm

Should be really fixed now :shock: Please get the latest version of the question bank 1.24.
If you like our products and services, please help us by posting your review here.

krizsan

Re: About Question enthuware.oce-ejbd.v6.2.505 :

Post by krizsan » Mon Nov 28, 2011 3:16 pm

Hi!
When I try to update, the program tells me that: Current major/minor version numbers are: 1/22
It also tells me that I am using version 1/22.
Thus it won't let me upgrade to 1/24.
Is there any place where I can download the upgrade manually?
Thanks!

krizsan
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 3:21 pm
Contact:

Re: About Question enthuware.oce-ejbd.v6.2.505 :

Post by krizsan » Mon Nov 28, 2011 3:25 pm

Nevermind!
Found the download.
There still seems to be something wrong with the version check, as the program still claims that 1/22 is the lates version, while I now run 1/24.
The answer is indeed fixed in this version of the question bank - thanks! :)

rkbansal83
Posts: 33
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 8:52 am
Contact:

Re: About Question enthuware.oce-ejbd.v6.2.505 :

Post by rkbansal83 » Tue Nov 27, 2012 10:34 pm

Explaination of this answer have below points
1 .security-role-ref: This is the name used by the bean code to refer to a security role. Since it is used inside the bean code, the bean provider specifies it in the deployment descriptor.

2. security-role: These are the logical roles that are available to the application. Since these are application specific, these are specified by the Application Assembler in the deployment descriptor. Also, since these are provided by the Application Assembler, the Application Assembler also has the responsibility of mapping security-role-ref to the security-role. Further, since the Application Assembler knows the business logic, she also specifies which bean methods can be called by which role using the <method-permission> tags.
The first point say that role-name inside the security-role-ref element is specified by bean provider, which is actually used in code (or can be specified using @DeclareRoles annotation as well)
For example in below, we have POMgr is the one which will be used by the code.

<enterprise-beans>
...
<security-role-ref>
<role-name>POMgr</role-name>
<role-link>myMgr</role-link>
</security-role-ref>

</enterprise-beans>

isn't this a logical role name ? If yes, then why second point is contradicting when saying that
logical role's are specified by the application assembler ?

admin
Site Admin
Posts: 8304
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 9:26 pm
Contact:

Re: About Question enthuware.oce-ejbd.v6.2.505 :

Post by admin » Wed Nov 28, 2012 8:08 am

Actually, as per section 19.3, The Bean Provider and Application Assembler may be the same person and so a logical role can be specified by both.

HTH,
Paul.
If you like our products and services, please help us by posting your review here.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests