[Dev] The SAPI proposal

Patrick Ohly patrick.ohly at intel.com
Fri May 23 14:15:04 GMT 2014


On Fri, 2014-05-23 at 14:33 +0200, José Bollo wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I just finished the wiki page that describes SAPI, the Secure CAPI,
> proposal: https://wiki.tizen.org/wiki/Security/SAPI
> 
> SAPI, the secure CAPI, is an implementation of the CAPI over IPC. The
> clients call the service SAPI through an API implementing CAPI. The
> service SAPI checks the privileges using Cynara.

When it does that, what would it pass as session_id string to
cynara_check()?

> Some of us are thinking that it is a good proposal because:
>  - Applications don't need to be rewritten (OSP ones)

This is also true for the alternative (putting Cynara checks into the
services themselves). I'm not saying that the alternative is better or
worse; I'm just pointing out that this here isn't a difference between
them and thus shouldn't be listed as advantage.

You mention one more advantage on the Wiki page:
 * Unification (simplification) of the API across the applications;

The proposal does not include changing any of the APIs used by
applications. Care to clarify what exactly it unifies or simplifies in
applications?

-- 
Best Regards, Patrick Ohly

The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although
I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way
represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak
on behalf of Intel on this matter.





More information about the Dev mailing list