Search Results

Search found 32130 results on 1286 pages for 'method chaining'.

Page 61/1286 | < Previous Page | 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68  | Next Page >

  • How do you overide a class that is called by another class with parent::method

    - by dan.codes
    I am trying to extend Mage_Catalog_Block_Product_View I have it setup in my local directory as its own module and everything works fine, I wasn't getting the results that I wanted. I then saw that another class extended that class as well. The method I am trying to override is the protected function _prepareLayout() This is the function class Mage_Review_Block_Product_View extends Mage_Catalog_Block_Product_View protected function _prepareLayout() { $this-&gt;getLayout()-&gt;createBlock('catalog/breadcrumbs'); $headBlock = $this-&gt;getLayout()-&gt;getBlock('head'); if ($headBlock) { $title = $this-&gt;getProduct()-&gt;getMetaTitle(); if ($title) { $headBlock-&gt;setTitle($title); } $keyword = $this-&gt;getProduct()-&gt;getMetaKeyword(); $currentCategory = Mage::registry('current_category'); if ($keyword) { $headBlock-&gt;setKeywords($keyword); } elseif($currentCategory) { $headBlock-&gt;setKeywords($this-&gt;getProduct()-&gt;getName()); } $description = $this-&gt;getProduct()-&gt;getMetaDescription(); if ($description) { $headBlock-&gt;setDescription( ($description) ); } else { $headBlock-&gt;setDescription( $this-&gt;getProduct()-&gt;getDescription() ); } } return parent::_prepareLayout(); } I am trying to modify it just a bit with the following, keep in mind I know there is a title prefix and suffix but I needed it only for the product page and also I needed to add text to the description. class MyCompany_Catalog_Block_Product_View extends Mage_Catalog_Block_Product_View protected function _prepareLayout() { $storeId = Mage::app()-&gt;getStore()-&gt;getId(); $this-&gt;getLayout()-&gt;createBlock('catalog/breadcrumbs'); $headBlock = $this-&gt;getLayout()-&gt;getBlock('head'); if ($headBlock) { $title = $this-&gt;getProduct()-&gt;getMetaTitle(); if ($title) { if($storeId == 2){ $title = "Pool Supplies Fast - " .$title; $headBlock-&gt;setTitle($title); } $headBlock-&gt;setTitle($title); }else{ $path = Mage::helper('catalog')-&gt;getBreadcrumbPath(); foreach ($path as $name =&gt; $breadcrumb) { $title[] = $breadcrumb['label']; } $newTitle = "Pool Supplies Fast - " . join($this-&gt;getTitleSeparator(), array_reverse($title)); $headBlock-&gt;setTitle($newTitle); } $keyword = $this-&gt;getProduct()-&gt;getMetaKeyword(); $currentCategory = Mage::registry('current_category'); if ($keyword) { $headBlock-&gt;setKeywords($keyword); } elseif($currentCategory) { $headBlock-&gt;setKeywords($this-&gt;getProduct()-&gt;getName()); } $description = $this-&gt;getProduct()-&gt;getMetaDescription(); if ($description) { if($storeId == 2){ $description = "Pool Supplies Fast - ". $this-&gt;getProduct()-&gt;getName() . " - " . $description; $headBlock-&gt;setDescription( ($description) ); }else{ $headBlock-&gt;setDescription( ($description) ); } } else { if($storeId == 2){ $description = "Pool Supplies Fast: ". $this-&gt;getProduct()-&gt;getName() . " - " . $this-&gt;getProduct()-&gt;getDescription(); $headBlock-&gt;setDescription( ($description) ); }else{ $headBlock-&gt;setDescription( $this-&gt;getProduct()-&gt;getDescription() ); } } } return Mage_Catalog_Block_Product_Abstract::_prepareLayout(); } This executs fine but then I notice that the following class Mage_Review_Block_Product_View_List extends which extends Mage_Review_Block_Product_View and that extends Mage_Catalog_Block_Product_View as well. Inside this class they call the _prepareLayout as well and call the parent with parent::_prepareLayout() class Mage_Review_Block_Product_View_List extends Mage_Review_Block_Product_View protected function _prepareLayout() { parent::_prepareLayout(); if ($toolbar = $this-&gt;getLayout()-&gt;getBlock('product_review_list.toolbar')) { $toolbar-&gt;setCollection($this-&gt;getReviewsCollection()); $this-&gt;setChild('toolbar', $toolbar); } return $this; } So obviously this just calls the same class I am extending and runs the function I am overiding but it doesn't get to my class because it is not in my class hierarchy and since it gets called after my class all the stuff in the parent class override what I have set. I'm not sure about the best way to extend this type of class and method, there has to be a good way to do this, I keep finding I am running into issues when trying to overide these prepare methods that are derived from the abstract classes, there seems to be so many classes overriding them and calling parent::method. What is the best way to override these functions?

    Read the article

  • Mistake in dispaly and insert method (double - ended queue)

    - by MANAL
    1) My problem when i make remove from right or left program will be remove true but when i call diplay method the content wrong like this I insert 12 43 65 23 and when make remove from left program will remove 12 but when call display method show like this 12 43 65 and when make remove from right program will remove 23 but when call display method show like this 12 43 Why ?????? ); and when i try to make insert after remove write this Can not insert right because the queue is full . first remove right and then u can insert right where is the problem ?? Please Help me please 2) My code FIRST CLASS class dqueue { private int fullsize; //number of all cells private int item_num; // number of busy cells only private int front,rear; public int j; private double [] dqarr; //========================================== public dqueue(int s) //constructor { fullsize = s; front = 0; rear = -1; item_num = 0; dqarr = new double[fullsize]; } //========================================== public void insert(double data) { if (rear == fullsize-1) rear = -1; rear++; dqarr[rear] = data; item_num++; } public double removeLeft() // take item from front of queue { double temp = dqarr[front++]; // get value and incr front if(front == fullsize) front = 0; item_num --; // one less item return temp; } public double removeRight() // take item from rear of queue { double temp = dqarr[rear--]; // get value and decr rear if(rear == -1) // rear = item_num -1; item_num --; // one less item return temp; } //========================================= public void display () //display items { for (int j=0;j //========================================= public int size() //number of items in queue { return item_num; } //========================================== public boolean isEmpty() // true if queue is empty { return (item_num ==0); } } SECOND CLASS import java.util.Scanner; class dqueuetest { public static void main(String[] args) { Scanner input = new Scanner(System.in); System.out.println(" Welcome here** "); System.out.println(" * Mind Of Programming Group*** "); System.out.println(" _________________________ "); System.out.println("enter size of your dqueue"); int size = input.nextInt(); dqueue mydq = new dqueue(size); System.out.println(""); System.out.println("enter your itemes"); //===================================== for(int i = 0;i<=size-1;i++) { System.out.printf("item %d:",i+1); double item = input.nextDouble(); mydq.insert(item); System.out.println(""); } //===================================== int queue =size ; int c = 0 ; while (c != 6) { System.out.println(""); System.out.println("**************************"); System.out.println(" MAIN MENUE"); System.out.println("1- INSERT RIGHT "); System.out.println("2- REMOVE LEFT"); System.out.println("3- REMOVE RIGHT"); System.out.println("4- DISPLAY"); System.out.println("5- SIZE"); System.out.println("6- EXIT"); System.out.println("**************************"); System.out.println("choose your operation by number(1-6)"); c = input.nextInt(); switch (c) { case 1: if (queue == size) System.out.print("Can not insert right because the queue is full . first remove right and then u can insert right "); else { System.out.print("enter your item: "); double item = input.nextDouble(); mydq.insert(item);} break; case 2: System.out.println("REMOVE FROM REAR :"); if( !mydq.isEmpty() ) { double item = mydq.removeLeft(); System.out.print(item + "\t"); } // end while System.out.println(""); mydq.display(); break; case 3: System.out.println("REMOVE FROM FRONT :"); if( !mydq.isEmpty() ) { double item = mydq.removeRight(); System.out.print(item + "\t"); } // end while System.out.println(""); mydq.display(); break; case 4: System.out.println("The items in Queue are :"); mydq.display(); break; case 5: System.out.println("The Size of the Queue is :"+mydq.size()); break; case 6: System.out.println("Good Bye"); break; default: System.out.println("wrong chiose enter again"); } //end switch } //end while } // end main }//end class

    Read the article

  • Configuring Fed Authentication Methods in OIF / IdP

    - by Damien Carru
    In this article, I will provide examples on how to configure OIF/IdP to map OAM Authentication Schemes to Federation Authentication Methods, based on the concepts introduced in my previous entry. I will show examples for the three protocols supported by OIF: SAML 2.0 SSO SAML 1.1 SSO OpenID 2.0 Enjoy the reading! Configuration As I mentioned in my previous article, mapping Federation Authentication Methods to OAM Authentication Schemes is protocol dependent, since the methods are defined in the various protocols (SAML 2.0, SAML 1.1, OpenID 2.0). As such, the WLST commands to set those mappings will involve: Either the SP Partner Profile and affect all Partners referencing that profile, which do not override the Federation Authentication Method to OAM Authentication Scheme mappings Or the SP Partner entry, which will only affect the SP Partner It is important to note that if an SP Partner is configured to define one or more Federation Authentication Method to OAM Authentication Scheme mappings, then all the mappings defined in the SP Partner Profile will be ignored. WLST Commands The two OIF WLST commands that can be used to define mapping Federation Authentication Methods to OAM Authentication Schemes are: addSPPartnerProfileAuthnMethod() to define a mapping on an SP Partner Profile, taking as parameters: The name of the SP Partner Profile The Federation Authentication Method The OAM Authentication Scheme name addSPPartnerAuthnMethod() to define a mapping on an SP Partner , taking as parameters: The name of the SP Partner The Federation Authentication Method The OAM Authentication Scheme name Note: I will discuss in a subsequent article the other parameters of those commands. In the next sections, I will show examples on how to use those methods: For SAML 2.0, I will configure the SP Partner Profile, that will apply all the mappings to SP Partners referencing this profile, unless they override mapping definition For SAML 1.1, I will configure the SP Partner. For OpenID 2.0, I will configure the SP/RP Partner SAML 2.0 Test Setup In this setup, OIF is acting as an IdP and is integrated with a remote SAML 2.0 SP partner identified by AcmeSP. In this test, I will perform Federation SSO with OIF/IdP configured to: Use LDAPScheme as the Authentication Scheme Use BasicScheme as the Authentication Scheme Map BasicSessionScheme  to  the urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:Password Federation Authentication Method Use OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme as the Authentication Scheme Map OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme to  the urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport Federation Authentication Method LDAPScheme as Authentication Scheme Using the OOTB settings regarding user authentication in OAM, the user will be challenged via a FORM based login page based on the LDAPScheme. Also the default Federation Authentication Method mappings configuration maps only the urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport to LDAPScheme (also marked as the default scheme used for authentication), FAAuthScheme, BasicScheme and BasicFAScheme. After authentication via FORM, OIF/IdP would issue an Assertion similar to: <samlp:Response ...>    <saml:Issuer ...>https://idp.com/oam/fed</saml:Issuer>    <samlp:Status>        <samlp:StatusCode Value="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:status:Success"/>    </samlp:Status>    <saml:Assertion ...>        <saml:Issuer ...>https://idp.com/oam/fed</saml:Issuer>        <dsig:Signature>            ...        </dsig:Signature>        <saml:Subject>            <saml:NameID ...>[email protected]</saml:NameID>            <saml:SubjectConfirmation Method="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:cm:bearer">                <saml:SubjectConfirmationData .../>            </saml:SubjectConfirmation>        </saml:Subject>        <saml:Conditions ...>            <saml:AudienceRestriction>                <saml:Audience>https://acme.com/sp</saml:Audience>            </saml:AudienceRestriction>        </saml:Conditions>        <saml:AuthnStatement AuthnInstant="2014-03-21T20:53:55Z" SessionIndex="id-6i-Dm0yB-HekG6cejktwcKIFMzYE8Yrmqwfd0azz" SessionNotOnOrAfter="2014-03-21T21:53:55Z">            <saml:AuthnContext>                <saml:AuthnContextClassRef>                   urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport                </saml:AuthnContextClassRef>            </saml:AuthnContext>        </saml:AuthnStatement>    </saml:Assertion></samlp:Response> BasicScheme as Authentication Scheme For this test, I will switch the default Authentication Scheme for the SP Partner Profile to BasicScheme instead of LDAPScheme. I will use the OIF WLST setSPPartnerProfileDefaultScheme() command and specify which scheme to be used as the default for the SP Partner Profile referenced by AcmeSP (which is saml20-sp-partner-profile in this case: getFedPartnerProfile("AcmeSP", "sp") ): Enter the WLST environment by executing:$IAM_ORACLE_HOME/common/bin/wlst.sh Connect to the WLS Admin server:connect() Navigate to the Domain Runtime branch:domainRuntime() Execute the setSPPartnerProfileDefaultScheme() command:setSPPartnerProfileDefaultScheme("saml20-sp-partner-profile", "BasicScheme") Exit the WLST environment:exit() The user will now be challenged via HTTP Basic Authentication defined in the BasicScheme for AcmeSP. Also, as noted earlier, the default Federation Authentication Method mappings configuration maps only the urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport to LDAPScheme (also marked as the default scheme used for authentication), FAAuthScheme, BasicScheme and BasicFAScheme. After authentication via HTTP Basic Authentication, OIF/IdP would issue an Assertion similar to: <samlp:Response ...>    <saml:Issuer ...>https://idp.com/oam/fed</saml:Issuer>    <samlp:Status>        <samlp:StatusCode Value="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:status:Success"/>    </samlp:Status>    <saml:Assertion ...>        <saml:Issuer ...>https://idp.com/oam/fed</saml:Issuer>        <dsig:Signature>            ...        </dsig:Signature>        <saml:Subject>            <saml:NameID ...>[email protected]</saml:NameID>            <saml:SubjectConfirmation Method="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:cm:bearer">                <saml:SubjectConfirmationData .../>            </saml:SubjectConfirmation>        </saml:Subject>        <saml:Conditions ...>            <saml:AudienceRestriction>                <saml:Audience>https://acme.com/sp</saml:Audience>            </saml:AudienceRestriction>        </saml:Conditions>        <saml:AuthnStatement AuthnInstant="2014-03-21T20:53:55Z" SessionIndex="id-6i-Dm0yB-HekG6cejktwcKIFMzYE8Yrmqwfd0azz" SessionNotOnOrAfter="2014-03-21T21:53:55Z">            <saml:AuthnContext>                <saml:AuthnContextClassRef>                   urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport                </saml:AuthnContextClassRef>            </saml:AuthnContext>        </saml:AuthnStatement>    </saml:Assertion></samlp:Response> Mapping BasicScheme To change the Federation Authentication Method mapping for the BasicScheme to urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:Password instead of urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport for the saml20-sp-partner-profile SAML 2.0 SP Partner Profile (the profile to which my AcmeSP Partner is bound to), I will execute the addSPPartnerProfileAuthnMethod() method: Enter the WLST environment by executing:$IAM_ORACLE_HOME/common/bin/wlst.sh Connect to the WLS Admin server:connect() Navigate to the Domain Runtime branch:domainRuntime() Execute the addSPPartnerProfileAuthnMethod() command:addSPPartnerProfileAuthnMethod("saml20-sp-partner-profile", "urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:Password", "BasicScheme") Exit the WLST environment:exit() After authentication via HTTP Basic Authentication, OIF/IdP would now issue an Assertion similar to (see that the AuthnContextClassRef was changed from PasswordProtectedTransport to Password): <samlp:Response ...>    <saml:Issuer ...>https://idp.com/oam/fed</saml:Issuer>    <samlp:Status>        <samlp:StatusCode Value="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:status:Success"/>    </samlp:Status>    <saml:Assertion ...>        <saml:Issuer ...>https://idp.com/oam/fed</saml:Issuer>        <dsig:Signature>            ...        </dsig:Signature>        <saml:Subject>            <saml:NameID ...>[email protected]</saml:NameID>            <saml:SubjectConfirmation Method="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:cm:bearer">                <saml:SubjectConfirmationData .../>            </saml:SubjectConfirmation>        </saml:Subject>        <saml:Conditions ...>            <saml:AudienceRestriction>                <saml:Audience>https://acme.com/sp</saml:Audience>            </saml:AudienceRestriction>        </saml:Conditions>        <saml:AuthnStatement AuthnInstant="2014-03-21T20:53:55Z" SessionIndex="id-6i-Dm0yB-HekG6cejktwcKIFMzYE8Yrmqwfd0azz" SessionNotOnOrAfter="2014-03-21T21:53:55Z">            <saml:AuthnContext>                <saml:AuthnContextClassRef>                   urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:Password                </saml:AuthnContextClassRef>            </saml:AuthnContext>        </saml:AuthnStatement>    </saml:Assertion></samlp:Response> OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme as Authentication Scheme For this test, I will switch the default Authentication Scheme for the SP Partner Profile to OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme instead of BasicScheme. I will use the OIF WLST setSPPartnerProfileDefaultScheme() command and specify which scheme to be used as the default for the SP Partner Profile referenced by AcmeSP (which is saml20-sp-partner-profile in this case: getFedPartnerProfile("AcmeSP", "sp") ): Enter the WLST environment by executing:$IAM_ORACLE_HOME/common/bin/wlst.sh Connect to the WLS Admin server:connect() Navigate to the Domain Runtime branch:domainRuntime() Execute the setSPPartnerProfileDefaultScheme() command:setSPPartnerProfileDefaultScheme("saml20-sp-partner-profile", "OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme") Exit the WLST environment:exit() The user will now be challenged via FORM defined in the OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme for AcmeSP. Contrarily to LDAPScheme and BasicScheme, the OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme is not mapped by default to any Federation Authentication Methods. As such, OIF/IdP will not be able to find a Federation Authentication Method and will set the method in the SAML Assertion to the OAM Authentication Scheme name. After authentication via FORM, OIF/IdP would issue an Assertion similar to (see the AuthnContextClassRef set to OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme): <samlp:Response ...>    <saml:Issuer ...>https://idp.com/oam/fed</saml:Issuer>    <samlp:Status>        <samlp:StatusCode Value="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:status:Success"/>    </samlp:Status>    <saml:Assertion ...>        <saml:Issuer ...>https://idp.com/oam/fed</saml:Issuer>        <dsig:Signature>            ...        </dsig:Signature>        <saml:Subject>            <saml:NameID ...>[email protected]</saml:NameID>            <saml:SubjectConfirmation Method="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:cm:bearer">                <saml:SubjectConfirmationData .../>            </saml:SubjectConfirmation>        </saml:Subject>        <saml:Conditions ...>            <saml:AudienceRestriction>                <saml:Audience>https://acme.com/sp</saml:Audience>            </saml:AudienceRestriction>        </saml:Conditions>        <saml:AuthnStatement AuthnInstant="2014-03-21T20:53:55Z" SessionIndex="id-6i-Dm0yB-HekG6cejktwcKIFMzYE8Yrmqwfd0azz" SessionNotOnOrAfter="2014-03-21T21:53:55Z">            <saml:AuthnContext>                <saml:AuthnContextClassRef> OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme                </saml:AuthnContextClassRef>            </saml:AuthnContext>        </saml:AuthnStatement>    </saml:Assertion></samlp:Response> Mapping OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme To add the OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme  to the Federation Authentication Method urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport mapping, I will execute the addSPPartnerProfileAuthnMethod() method: Enter the WLST environment by executing:$IAM_ORACLE_HOME/common/bin/wlst.sh Connect to the WLS Admin server:connect() Navigate to the Domain Runtime branch:domainRuntime() Execute the addSPPartnerProfileAuthnMethod() command:addSPPartnerProfileAuthnMethod("saml20-sp-partner-profile", "urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport", "OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme") Exit the WLST environment:exit() After authentication via FORM, OIF/IdP would now issue an Assertion similar to (see that the method was changed from OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme to PasswordProtectedTransport): <samlp:Response ...>    <saml:Issuer ...>https://idp.com/oam/fed</saml:Issuer>    <samlp:Status>        <samlp:StatusCode Value="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:status:Success"/>    </samlp:Status>    <saml:Assertion ...>        <saml:Issuer ...>https://idp.com/oam/fed</saml:Issuer>        <dsig:Signature>            ...        </dsig:Signature>        <saml:Subject>            <saml:NameID ...>[email protected]</saml:NameID>            <saml:SubjectConfirmation Method="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:cm:bearer">                <saml:SubjectConfirmationData .../>            </saml:SubjectConfirmation>        </saml:Subject>        <saml:Conditions ...>            <saml:AudienceRestriction>                <saml:Audience>https://acme.com/sp</saml:Audience>            </saml:AudienceRestriction>        </saml:Conditions>        <saml:AuthnStatement AuthnInstant="2014-03-21T20:53:55Z" SessionIndex="id-6i-Dm0yB-HekG6cejktwcKIFMzYE8Yrmqwfd0azz" SessionNotOnOrAfter="2014-03-21T21:53:55Z">            <saml:AuthnContext>                <saml:AuthnContextClassRef>                   urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport                </saml:AuthnContextClassRef>            </saml:AuthnContext>        </saml:AuthnStatement>    </saml:Assertion></samlp:Response> SAML 1.1 Test Setup In this setup, OIF is acting as an IdP and is integrated with a remote SAML 1.1 SP partner identified by AcmeSP. In this test, I will perform Federation SSO with OIF/IdP configured to: Use LDAPScheme as the Authentication Scheme Use OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme as the Authentication Scheme Map OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme to  the urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport Federation Authentication Method Use LDAPScheme as the Authentication Scheme Map LDAPScheme to  the urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport Federation Authentication Method LDAPScheme as Authentication Scheme Using the OOTB settings regarding user authentication in OAM, the user will be challenged via a FORM based login page based on the LDAPScheme. Also the default Federation Authentication Method mappings configuration maps only the urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:am:password to LDAPScheme (also marked as the default scheme used for authentication), FAAuthScheme, BasicScheme and BasicFAScheme. After authentication via FORM, OIF/IdP would issue an Assertion similar to: <samlp:Response ...>    <samlp:Status>        <samlp:StatusCode Value="samlp:Success"/>    </samlp:Status>    <saml:Assertion Issuer="https://idp.com/oam/fed" ...>        <saml:Conditions ...>            <saml:AudienceRestriction>                <saml:Audience>https://acme.com/sp/ssov11</saml:Audience>            </saml:AudienceRestriction>        </saml:Conditions>        <saml:AuthnStatement AuthenticationInstant="2014-03-21T20:53:55Z" AuthenticationMethod="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:am:password">            <saml:Subject>                <saml:NameIdentifier ...>[email protected]</saml:NameIdentifier>                <saml:SubjectConfirmation>                   <saml:ConfirmationMethod>                       urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:cm:bearer                   </saml:ConfirmationMethod>                </saml:SubjectConfirmation>            </saml:Subject>        </saml:AuthnStatement>        <dsig:Signature>            ...        </dsig:Signature>    </saml:Assertion></samlp:Response> OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme as Authentication Scheme For this test, I will switch the default Authentication Scheme for the SP Partner to OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme instead of LDAPScheme. I will use the OIF WLST setSPPartnerDefaultScheme() command and specify which scheme to be used as the default for the SP Partner: Enter the WLST environment by executing:$IAM_ORACLE_HOME/common/bin/wlst.sh Connect to the WLS Admin server:connect() Navigate to the Domain Runtime branch:domainRuntime() Execute the setSPPartnerDefaultScheme() command:setSPPartnerDefaultScheme("AcmeSP", "OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme") Exit the WLST environment:exit() The user will be challenged via FORM defined in the OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme for AcmeSP. Contrarily to LDAPScheme, the OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme is not mapped by default to any Federation Authentication Methods (in the SP Partner Profile). As such, OIF/IdP will not be able to find a Federation Authentication Method and will set the method in the SAML Assertion to the OAM Authentication Scheme name. After authentication via FORM, OIF/IdP would issue an Assertion similar to (see the AuthenticationMethod set to OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme): <samlp:Response ...>    <samlp:Status>        <samlp:StatusCode Value="samlp:Success"/>    </samlp:Status>    <saml:Assertion Issuer="https://idp.com/oam/fed" ...>        <saml:Conditions ...>            <saml:AudienceRestriction>                <saml:Audience>https://acme.com/sp/ssov11</saml:Audience>            </saml:AudienceRestriction>        </saml:Conditions>        <saml:AuthnStatement AuthenticationInstant="2014-03-21T20:53:55Z" AuthenticationMethod="OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme">            <saml:Subject>                <saml:NameIdentifier ...>[email protected]</saml:NameIdentifier>                <saml:SubjectConfirmation>                   <saml:ConfirmationMethod>                       urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:cm:bearer                   </saml:ConfirmationMethod>                </saml:SubjectConfirmation>            </saml:Subject>        </saml:AuthnStatement>        <dsig:Signature>            ...        </dsig:Signature>    </saml:Assertion></samlp:Response> Mapping OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme To map the OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme  to the Federation Authentication Method urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:am:password for this SP Partner only, I will execute the addSPPartnerAuthnMethod() method: Enter the WLST environment by executing:$IAM_ORACLE_HOME/common/bin/wlst.sh Connect to the WLS Admin server:connect() Navigate to the Domain Runtime branch:domainRuntime() Execute the addSPPartnerAuthnMethod() command:addSPPartnerAuthnMethod("AcmeSP", "urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:am:password", "OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme") Exit the WLST environment:exit() After authentication via FORM, OIF/IdP would now issue an Assertion similar to (see that the method was changed from OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme to password): <samlp:Response ...>    <samlp:Status>        <samlp:StatusCode Value="samlp:Success"/>    </samlp:Status>    <saml:Assertion Issuer="https://idp.com/oam/fed" ...>        <saml:Conditions ...>            <saml:AudienceRestriction>                <saml:Audience>https://acme.com/sp/ssov11</saml:Audience>            </saml:AudienceRestriction>        </saml:Conditions>        <saml:AuthnStatement AuthenticationInstant="2014-03-21T20:53:55Z" AuthenticationMethod="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:am:password">            <saml:Subject>                <saml:NameIdentifier ...>[email protected]</saml:NameIdentifier>                <saml:SubjectConfirmation>                   <saml:ConfirmationMethod>                       urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:cm:bearer                   </saml:ConfirmationMethod>                </saml:SubjectConfirmation>            </saml:Subject>        </saml:AuthnStatement>        <dsig:Signature>            ...        </dsig:Signature>    </saml:Assertion></samlp:Response> LDAPScheme as Authentication Scheme I will now show that by defining a Federation Authentication Mapping at the Partner level, this now ignores all mappings defined at the SP Partner Profile level. For this test, I will switch the default Authentication Scheme for this SP Partner back to LDAPScheme, and the Assertion issued by OIF/IdP will not be able to map this LDAPScheme to a Federation Authentication Method anymore, since A Federation Authentication Method mapping is defined at the SP Partner level and thus the mappings defined at the SP Partner Profile are ignored The LDAPScheme is not listed in the mapping at the Partner level I will use the OIF WLST setSPPartnerDefaultScheme() command and specify which scheme to be used as the default for this SP Partner: Enter the WLST environment by executing:$IAM_ORACLE_HOME/common/bin/wlst.sh Connect to the WLS Admin server:connect() Navigate to the Domain Runtime branch:domainRuntime() Execute the setSPPartnerDefaultScheme() command:setSPPartnerDefaultScheme("AcmeSP", "LDAPScheme") Exit the WLST environment:exit() After authentication via FORM, OIF/IdP would issue an Assertion similar to (see the AuthenticationMethod set to LDAPScheme): <samlp:Response ...>    <samlp:Status>        <samlp:StatusCode Value="samlp:Success"/>    </samlp:Status>    <saml:Assertion Issuer="https://idp.com/oam/fed" ...>        <saml:Conditions ...>            <saml:AudienceRestriction>                <saml:Audience>https://acme.com/sp/ssov11</saml:Audience>            </saml:AudienceRestriction>        </saml:Conditions>        <saml:AuthnStatement AuthenticationInstant="2014-03-21T20:53:55Z" AuthenticationMethod="LDAPScheme">            <saml:Subject>                <saml:NameIdentifier ...>[email protected]</saml:NameIdentifier>                <saml:SubjectConfirmation>                   <saml:ConfirmationMethod>                       urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:cm:bearer                   </saml:ConfirmationMethod>                </saml:SubjectConfirmation>            </saml:Subject>        </saml:AuthnStatement>        <dsig:Signature>            ...        </dsig:Signature>    </saml:Assertion></samlp:Response> Mapping LDAPScheme at Partner Level To fix this issue, we will need to add the LDAPScheme  to the Federation Authentication Method urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:am:password mapping for this SP Partner only. I will execute the addSPPartnerAuthnMethod() method: Enter the WLST environment by executing:$IAM_ORACLE_HOME/common/bin/wlst.sh Connect to the WLS Admin server:connect() Navigate to the Domain Runtime branch:domainRuntime() Execute the addSPPartnerAuthnMethod() command:addSPPartnerAuthnMethod("AcmeSP", "urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:am:password", "LDAPScheme") Exit the WLST environment:exit() After authentication via FORM, OIF/IdP would now issue an Assertion similar to (see that the method was changed from LDAPScheme to password): <samlp:Response ...>    <samlp:Status>        <samlp:StatusCode Value="samlp:Success"/>    </samlp:Status>    <saml:Assertion Issuer="https://idp.com/oam/fed" ...>        <saml:Conditions ...>            <saml:AudienceRestriction>                <saml:Audience>https://acme.com/sp/ssov11</saml:Audience>            </saml:AudienceRestriction>        </saml:Conditions>        <saml:AuthnStatement AuthenticationInstant="2014-03-21T20:53:55Z" AuthenticationMethod="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:am:password">            <saml:Subject>                <saml:NameIdentifier ...>[email protected]</saml:NameIdentifier>                <saml:SubjectConfirmation>                   <saml:ConfirmationMethod>                       urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:cm:bearer                   </saml:ConfirmationMethod>                </saml:SubjectConfirmation>            </saml:Subject>        </saml:AuthnStatement>        <dsig:Signature>            ...        </dsig:Signature>    </saml:Assertion></samlp:Response> OpenID 2.0 In the OpenID 2.0 flows, the RP must request use of PAPE, in order for OIF/IdP/OP to include PAPE information. For OpenID 2.0, the configuration will involve mapping a list of OpenID 2.0 policies to a list of Authentication Schemes. The WLST command will take a list of policies, delimited by the ',' character, instead of SAML 2.0 or SAML 1.1 where a single Federation Authentication Method had to be specified. Test Setup In this setup, OIF is acting as an IdP/OP and is integrated with a remote OpenID 2.0 SP/RP partner identified by AcmeRP. In this test, I will perform Federation SSO with OIF/IdP configured to: Use LDAPScheme as the Authentication Scheme Map LDAPScheme to  the http://schemas.openid.net/pape/policies/2007/06/phishing-resistant and http://openid-policies/password-protected policies Federation Authentication Methods (the second one is a custom for this use case) LDAPScheme as Authentication Scheme Using the OOTB settings regarding user authentication in OAM, the user will be challenged via a FORM based login page based on the LDAPScheme. No Federation Authentication Method is defined OOTB for OpenID 2.0, so if the IdP/OP issue an SSO response with a PAPE Response element, it will specify the scheme name instead of Federation Authentication Methods After authentication via FORM, OIF/IdP would issue an SSO Response similar to: https://acme.com/openid?refid=id-9PKVXZmRxAeDYcgLqPm36ClzOMA-&openid.ns=http%3A%2F%2Fspecs.openid.net%2Fauth%2F2.0&openid.mode=id_res&openid.op_endpoint=https%3A%2F%2Fidp.com%2Fopenid&openid.claimed_id=https%3A%2F%2Fidp.com%2Fopenid%3Fid%3Did-38iCmmlAVEXPsFjnFVKArfn5RIiF75D5doorhEgqqPM%3D&openid.identity=https%3A%2F%2Fidp.com%2Fopenid%3Fid%3Did-38iCmmlAVEXPsFjnFVKArfn5RIiF75D5doorhEgqqPM%3D&openid.return_to=https%3A%2F%2Facme.com%2Fopenid%3Frefid%3Did-9PKVXZmRxAeDYcgLqPm36ClzOMA-&openid.response_nonce=2014-03-24T19%3A20%3A06Zid-YPa2kTNNFftZkgBb460jxJGblk2g--iNwPpDI7M1&openid.assoc_handle=id-6a5S6zhAKaRwQNUnjTKROREdAGSjWodG1el4xyz3&openid.ns.ax=http%3A%2F%2Fopenid.net%2Fsrv%2Fax%2F1.0&openid.ax.mode=fetch_response&openid.ax.type.attr0=http%3A%2F%2Fsession%2Fcount&openid.ax.value.attr0=1&openid.ax.type.attr1=http%3A%2F%2Fopenid.net%2Fschema%2FnamePerson%2Ffriendly&openid.ax.value.attr1=My+name+is+Bobby+Smith&openid.ax.type.attr2=http%3A%2F%2Fschemas.openid.net%2Fax%2Fapi%2Fuser_id&openid.ax.value.attr2=bob&openid.ax.type.attr3=http%3A%2F%2Faxschema.org%2Fcontact%2Femail&openid.ax.value.attr3=bob%40oracle.com&openid.ax.type.attr4=http%3A%2F%2Fsession%2Fipaddress&openid.ax.value.attr4=10.145.120.253&openid.ns.pape=http%3A%2F%2Fspecs.openid.net%2Fextensions%2Fpape%2F1.0&openid.pape.auth_time=2014-03-24T19%3A20%3A05Z&openid.pape.auth_policies=LDAPScheme&openid.signed=op_endpoint%2Cclaimed_id%2Cidentity%2Creturn_to%2Cresponse_nonce%2Cassoc_handle%2Cns.ax%2Cax.mode%2Cax.type.attr0%2Cax.value.attr0%2Cax.type.attr1%2Cax.value.attr1%2Cax.type.attr2%2Cax.value.attr2%2Cax.type.attr3%2Cax.value.attr3%2Cax.type.attr4%2Cax.value.attr4%2Cns.pape%2Cpape.auth_time%2Cpape.auth_policies&openid.sig=mYMgbGYSs22l8e%2FDom9NRPw15u8%3D Mapping LDAPScheme To map the LDAP Scheme to the http://schemas.openid.net/pape/policies/2007/06/phishing-resistant and http://openid-policies/password-protected policies Federation Authentication Methods, I will execute the addSPPartnerAuthnMethod() method (the policies will be comma separated): Enter the WLST environment by executing:$IAM_ORACLE_HOME/common/bin/wlst.sh Connect to the WLS Admin server:connect() Navigate to the Domain Runtime branch:domainRuntime() Execute the addSPPartnerAuthnMethod() command:addSPPartnerAuthnMethod("AcmeRP", "http://schemas.openid.net/pape/policies/2007/06/phishing-resistant,http://openid-policies/password-protected", "LDAPScheme") Exit the WLST environment:exit() After authentication via FORM, OIF/IdP would now issue an Assertion similar to (see that the method was changed from LDAPScheme to the two policies): https://acme.com/openid?refid=id-9PKVXZmRxAeDYcgLqPm36ClzOMA-&openid.ns=http%3A%2F%2Fspecs.openid.net%2Fauth%2F2.0&openid.mode=id_res&openid.op_endpoint=https%3A%2F%2Fidp.com%2Fopenid&openid.claimed_id=https%3A%2F%2Fidp.com%2Fopenid%3Fid%3Did-38iCmmlAVEXPsFjnFVKArfn5RIiF75D5doorhEgqqPM%3D&openid.identity=https%3A%2F%2Fidp.com%2Fopenid%3Fid%3Did-38iCmmlAVEXPsFjnFVKArfn5RIiF75D5doorhEgqqPM%3D&openid.return_to=https%3A%2F%2Facme.com%2Fopenid%3Frefid%3Did-9PKVXZmRxAeDYcgLqPm36ClzOMA-&openid.response_nonce=2014-03-24T19%3A20%3A06Zid-YPa2kTNNFftZkgBb460jxJGblk2g--iNwPpDI7M1&openid.assoc_handle=id-6a5S6zhAKaRwQNUnjTKROREdAGSjWodG1el4xyz3&openid.ns.ax=http%3A%2F%2Fopenid.net%2Fsrv%2Fax%2F1.0&openid.ax.mode=fetch_response&openid.ax.type.attr0=http%3A%2F%2Fsession%2Fcount&openid.ax.value.attr0=1&openid.ax.type.attr1=http%3A%2F%2Fopenid.net%2Fschema%2FnamePerson%2Ffriendly&openid.ax.value.attr1=My+name+is+Bobby+Smith&openid.ax.type.attr2=http%3A%2F%2Fschemas.openid.net%2Fax%2Fapi%2Fuser_id&openid.ax.value.attr2=bob&openid.ax.type.attr3=http%3A%2F%2Faxschema.org%2Fcontact%2Femail&openid.ax.value.attr3=bob%40oracle.com&openid.ax.type.attr4=http%3A%2F%2Fsession%2Fipaddress&openid.ax.value.attr4=10.145.120.253&openid.ns.pape=http%3A%2F%2Fspecs.openid.net%2Fextensions%2Fpape%2F1.0&openid.pape.auth_time=2014-03-24T19%3A20%3A05Z&openid.pape.auth_policies=http%3A%2F%2Fschemas.openid.net%2Fpape%2Fpolicies%2F2007%2F06%2Fphishing-resistant+http%3A%2F%2Fopenid-policies%2Fpassword-protected&openid.signed=op_endpoint%2Cclaimed_id%2Cidentity%2Creturn_to%2Cresponse_nonce%2Cassoc_handle%2Cns.ax%2Cax.mode%2Cax.type.attr0%2Cax.value.attr0%2Cax.type.attr1%2Cax.value.attr1%2Cax.type.attr2%2Cax.value.attr2%2Cax.type.attr3%2Cax.value.attr3%2Cax.type.attr4%2Cax.value.attr4%2Cns.pape%2Cpape.auth_time%2Cpape.auth_policies&openid.sig=mYMgbGYSs22l8e%2FDom9NRPw15u8%3D In the next article, I will cover how OIF/IdP can be configured so that an SP can request a specific Federation Authentication Method to challenge the user during Federation SSO.Cheers,Damien Carru

    Read the article

  • GPUImage terminates due to [AVAssetWriter startWriting] Cannot call method when status is 3'

    - by user2869423
    I am having an issue running GPUImage. I have modified SimpleVideoFileFilter program(replaced the filter with a chromakeyfilter) and am using my own video. My program is terminating due to the following error: [AVAssetWriter startWriting] Cannot call method when status is 3' I have gone through the forums but not sure why the moviewriter is closing and then someone is writing to it. I am using iPhone4 running iOS 7.0 Any clues are greatly appreciated. Thanks much!

    Read the article

  • 128-Bit Hash Method

    - by Kyle Rozendo
    Hi All, Does anyone know of a hashing method that you can use with .NET, that will output 128 Bytes? I cannot use SHA-2+ generation hashes, as it's not supported on many client machines. Thanks, Kyle

    Read the article

  • Ruby: Passing optional objects to method

    - by Sam
    Class TShirt def size(suggested_size) if suggested_size == nil size = "please choose a size" else size = suggested end end end tshirt = TShirt.new tshirt.size("M") == "M" tshirt = TShirt.new size = tshirt.size(nil) == "please choose a size" What is a better way to have optional objects in a method? Procs?

    Read the article

  • How to serialize parameters in Web Service method

    - by Georgi
    Hi, I have this problem. I have WCF .Net C# web service with this method: public interface IMyService { // TODO: Add your service operations here [OperationContract] ListOfRequests GetListOfRequests(string par1, string par2, string par3, DateTime par4, DateTime par5, string par6, string par7); } public class MyService : IMyService { public ListOfRequests GetListOfRequests(string par1, string par2, string par3, DateTime par4, DateTime par5, string par6, string par7) { // .... web method code here; } } The problem is that when I generate the web service the wsdl schema return this: <xs:element name="GetListOfRequests"> <xs:complexType> <xs:sequence> <xs:element minOccurs="0" name="par1" nillable="true" type="xs:string" /> <xs:element minOccurs="0" name="par2" nillable="true" type="xs:string" /> <xs:element minOccurs="0" name="par3" nillable="true" type="xs:string" /> <xs:element minOccurs="0" name="par4" type="xs:dateTime" /> <xs:element minOccurs="0" name="par5" type="xs:dateTime" /> <xs:element minOccurs="0" name="par6" nillable="true" type="xs:string" /> <xs:element minOccurs="0" name="par7" nillable="true" type="xs:string" /> </xs:sequence> </xs:complexType> </xs:element> and I want my parameters to be not null like this: <xs:element name="GetListOfRequests"> <xs:complexType> <xs:sequence> <xs:element minOccurs="1" name="par1" nillable="false" type="xs:string" /> <xs:element minOccurs="1" name="par2" nillable="false" type="xs:string" /> <xs:element minOccurs="1" name="par3" nillable="false" type="xs:string" /> <xs:element minOccurs="1" name="par4" type="xs:dateTime" /> <xs:element minOccurs="1" name="par5" type="xs:dateTime" /> <xs:element minOccurs="1" name="par6" nillable="false" type="xs:string" /> <xs:element minOccurs="0" name="par7" nillable="true" type="xs:string" /> </xs:sequence> </xs:complexType> </xs:element> How can I serizalize parameters to achieve this? Thank you in advance for your help. Regards, Georgi

    Read the article

  • undefined method `call' for LiquidView:Class

    - by user181186
    I trying to use Liquid template engine plugin , but I 'm getting the following error while controller tries to render a .liquid template . "undefined method `call' for LiquidView:Class" I installed it as a plugin according to http://wiki.github.com/tobi/liquid/getting-liquid-to-work-in-rails I using Rails 2.3.5 and Ruby 1.8.7. Does anyone had the same problem before ?

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC Routing Via Method Attributes

    - by TorgoGuy
    In the StackOverflow Podcast #54, Jeff mentions they register their URL routes in the StackOverflow codebase via an attribute above the method that handles the route. Sounds like a good concept (with the caveat that Phil Haack brought up regarding route priorities). Could someone provide some sample to to make this happen? Also, any "best practices" for using this style of routing?

    Read the article

  • Refactoring method with many conditional return statements

    - by MC.
    Hi, I have a method for validation that has many conditional statements. Basically it goes If Check1 = false return false If Check2 = false return false etc FxCop complains that the cyclomatic complexity is too high. I know that it is not best practice to have return statements in the middle of functions, but at the same time the only alternative I see is an ugly list of If-else statements. What is the best way to approach this? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Opposite method of math power adding numbers

    - by adopilot
    I have method for converting array of Booleans to integer. It looks like this class Program { public static int GivMeInt(bool[] outputs) { int data = 0; for (int i = 0; i < 8; i++) { data += ((outputs[i] == true) ? Convert.ToInt32(Math.Pow(2, i)) : 0); } return data; } static void Main(string[] args) { bool[] outputs = new bool[8]; outputs[0] = false; outputs[1] = true; outputs[2] = false; outputs[3] = true; outputs[4] = false; outputs[5] = false; outputs[6] = false; outputs[7] = false; int data = GivMeInt(outputs); Console.WriteLine(data); Console.ReadKey(); } } Now I want to make opposite method returning array of Booleans values As I am short with knowledge of .NET and C# until now I have only my mind hardcoding of switch statement or if conditions for every possible int value. public static bool[] GiveMeBool(int data) { bool[] outputs = new bool[8]; if (data == 0) { outputs[0] = false; outputs[1] = false; outputs[2] = false; outputs[3] = false; outputs[4] = false; outputs[5] = false; outputs[6] = false; outputs[7] = false; } //After thousand lines of coed if (data == 255) { outputs[0] = true; outputs[1] = true; outputs[2] = true; outputs[3] = true; outputs[4] = true; outputs[5] = true; outputs[6] = true; outputs[7] = true; } return outputs; } I know that there must be easier way.

    Read the article

  • Uploading a file using post() method of QNetworkAccessManager

    - by user304361
    I'm having some trouble with a Qt application; specifically with the QNetworkAccessManager class. I'm attempting to perform a simple HTTP upload of a binary file using the post() method of the QNetworkAccessManager. The documentation states that I can give a pointer to a QIODevice to post(), and that the class will transmit the data found in the QIODevice. This suggests to me that I ought to be able to give post() a pointer to a QFile. For example: QFile compressedFile("temp"); compressedFile.open(QIODevice::ReadOnly); netManager.post(QNetworkRequest(QUrl("http://mywebsite.com/upload") ), &compressedFile); What seems to happen on the Windows system where I'm developing this is that my Qt application pushes the data from the QFile, but then doesn't complete the request; it seems to be sitting there waiting for more data to show up from the file. The post request isn't "closed" until I manually kill the application, at which point the whole file shows up at my server end. From some debugging and research, I think this is happening because the read() operation of QFile doesn't return -1 when you reach the end of the file. I think that QNetworkAccessManager is trying to read from the QIODevice until it gets a -1 from read(), at which point it assumes there is no more data and closes the request. If it keeps getting a return code of zero from read(), QNetworkAccessManager assumes that there might be more data coming, and so it keeps waiting for that hypothetical data. I've confirmed with some test code that the read() operation of QFile just returns zero after you've read to the end of the file. This seems to be incompatible with the way that the post() method of QNetworkAccessManager expects a QIODevice to behave. My questions are: Is this some sort of limitation with the way that QFile works under Windows? Is there some other way I should be using either QFile or QNetworkAccessManager to push a file via post()? Is this not going to work at all, and will I have to find some other way to upload my file? Any suggestions or hints would be appreciated. Thanks, Don

    Read the article

  • Maximum Method Name Length

    - by Josh
    Does anyone happen to know what the maximum length of a method name is in your programming language of choice? I was going to make this a C# specific question, but I think it would be nice to know across the spectrum. What are the factors involved as well: Does the language specification limit this? What does the compiler limit it to? Is it different on 32bit vs 64bit machines?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68  | Next Page >