Log the authenticated users

My "imsimta version" output is given below.
iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 Patch 2 (built Jul 14 2004)
libimta.so 5.2 Patch 2 (built 19:30:12, Jul 14 2004)
SunOS auth02 5.9 Generic_118558-06 sun4u sparc SUNW,Sun-Fire-V240
I have setup smtp authentication and it works fine. But if a user autheticates with his valied password but has put some other return email address in his mail client, I could see that return mail address in my iMS mail.log_current, so unable to identify the exact sender. (see the parts in bold)
22-Oct-2005 15:33:15.12 tcp_auth tcp_local EA 3 [email protected] rfc822;[email protected] [email protected] host01 (auth02.domain.com [serverip])
How can I log the authenticated username in same mail.log_current output.

I had already set LOG_CONNECTION=1 to get given log format. I changed it to LOG_CONNECTION=128 and compiled, but I am unable to get the desired output.

Similar Messages

Workspace Credential Conflict between Logged-in User and the Authenticated User

Hi there,
I am running LiveCycle ES Update1 SP2 with Process Management component on WIN/JBoss/SQL Server 2005.
I have been encountering user credential conflicts from time to time, but it has not been consistent and the problem manifested in various ways, such as:
- problem when logging in with error "An error occurred retrieving tasks." on the login screen
- user logs in successfully but is showing somebody else queue(s) with his/her own queue with no task in there
- fails to claim task from group queue.
The stacktrace from the server.log file I collected from a production system shows the exception below.
Has anybody else encountered the similar problem?
It looks to me that it doesn't log out cleanly and some kind of caching is done on the authenticated session and is not cleaned up properly on user logout.
2009-07-10 15:05:13,955 ERROR [com.adobe.workspace.AssemblerUtility] ALC-WKS-005-008: Security exception: the user specified in the fill parameters (oid=F0FA390C-AECC-BB19-F0D7-6CA13D6CBF83) did not match the authenticated user (oid=F25892EE-80CE-8C24-E40D-881F631AA8BE).
2009-07-10 15:05:13,955 INFO [STDOUT] [LCDS] [ERROR] Exception when invoking service 'remoting-service': flex.messaging.MessageException: ALC-WKS-005-008: Security exception: the user specified in the fill parameters (oid=F0FA390C-AECC-BB19-F0D7-6CA13D6CBF83) did not match the authenticated user (oid=F25892EE-80CE-8C24-E40D-881F631AA8BE).
incomingMessage: Flex Message (flex.messaging.messages.RemotingMessage)
    operation = submitWithData
    clientId = F3D2CDD0-330F-F00B-C710-5AF3F7CB4138
    destination = task-actions
    messageId = 7E385A6B-E4E6-3A81-CD6A-630DF4FAE5BB
    timestamp = 1247202313955
    timeToLive = 0
    body = null
    hdr(DSEndpoint) = workspace-polling-amf
    hdr(DSId) = F3C38977-171B-7BED-3B16-F3A5FE419479
Exception: flex.messaging.MessageException: ALC-WKS-005-008: Security exception: the user specified in the fill parameters (oid=F0FA390C-AECC-BB19-F0D7-6CA13D6CBF83) did not match the authenticated user (oid=F25892EE-80CE-8C24-E40D-881F631AA8BE).
    at com.adobe.workspace.AssemblerUtility.createMessageException(AssemblerUtility.java:369)
    at com.adobe.workspace.AssemblerUtility.checkParameters(AssemblerUtility.java:561)
    at com.adobe.workspace.tasks.TaskActions.callSubmitService(TaskActions.java:788)
    at com.adobe.workspace.tasks.TaskActions.submitWithData(TaskActions.java:773)
    at sun.reflect.GeneratedMethodAccessor941.invoke(Unknown Source)
    at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:25)
    at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:585)
    at flex.messaging.services.remoting.adapters.JavaAdapter.invoke(JavaAdapter.java:421)
    at flex.messaging.services.RemotingService.serviceMessage(RemotingService.java:183)
    at flex.messaging.MessageBroker.routeMessageToService(MessageBroker.java:1495)
    at flex.messaging.endpoints.AbstractEndpoint.serviceMessage(AbstractEndpoint.java:882)
    at flex.messaging.endpoints.amf.MessageBrokerFilter.invoke(MessageBrokerFilter.java:121)
    at flex.messaging.endpoints.amf.LegacyFilter.invoke(LegacyFilter.java:158)
    at flex.messaging.endpoints.amf.SessionFilter.invoke(SessionFilter.java:44)
    at flex.messaging.endpoints.amf.BatchProcessFilter.invoke(BatchProcessFilter.java:67)
    at flex.messaging.endpoints.amf.SerializationFilter.invoke(SerializationFilter.java:146)
    at flex.messaging.endpoints.BaseHTTPEndpoint.service(BaseHTTPEndpoint.java:278)
    at flex.messaging.MessageBrokerServlet.service(MessageBrokerServlet.java:315)
    at javax.servlet.http.HttpServlet.service(HttpServlet.java:810)
    at org.apache.catalina.core.ApplicationFilterChain.internalDoFilter(ApplicationFilterChain.j ava:252)
    at org.apache.catalina.core.ApplicationFilterChain.doFilter(ApplicationFilterChain.java:173)
    at com.adobe.workspace.events.RemoteEventClientLifeCycle.doFilter(RemoteEventClientLifeCycle .java:138)
    at org.apache.catalina.core.ApplicationFilterChain.internalDoFilter(ApplicationFilterChain.j ava:202)
    at org.apache.catalina.core.ApplicationFilterChain.doFilter(ApplicationFilterChain.java:173)
    at org.jboss.web.tomcat.filters.ReplyHeaderFilter.doFilter(ReplyHeaderFilter.java:81)
    at org.apache.catalina.core.ApplicationFilterChain.internalDoFilter(ApplicationFilterChain.j ava:202)
    at org.apache.catalina.core.ApplicationFilterChain.doFilter(ApplicationFilterChain.java:173)
    at org.apache.catalina.core.StandardWrapperValve.invoke(StandardWrapperValve.java:213)
    at org.apache.catalina.core.StandardContextValve.invoke(StandardContextValve.java:178)
    at org.jboss.web.tomcat.security.CustomPrincipalValve.invoke(CustomPrincipalValve.java:39)
    at org.jboss.web.tomcat.security.SecurityAssociationValve.invoke(SecurityAssociationValve.ja va:159)
    at org.jboss.web.tomcat.security.JaccContextValve.invoke(JaccContextValve.java:59)
    at org.apache.catalina.core.StandardHostValve.invoke(StandardHostValve.java:126)
    at org.apache.catalina.valves.ErrorReportValve.invoke(ErrorReportValve.java:105)
    at org.apache.catalina.core.StandardEngineValve.invoke(StandardEngineValve.java:107)
    at org.apache.catalina.connector.CoyoteAdapter.service(CoyoteAdapter.java:148)
    at org.apache.coyote.http11.Http11Processor.process(Http11Processor.java:856)
    at org.apache.coyote.http11.Http11Protocol$Http11ConnectionHandler.processConnection(Http11P rotocol.java:744)
    at org.apache.tomcat.util.net.PoolTcpEndpoint.processSocket(PoolTcpEndpoint.java:527)
    at org.apache.tomcat.util.net.MasterSlaveWorkerThread.run(MasterSlaveWorkerThread.java:112)
    at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:595)
Kendy

I am having the same server issue and i cant get hold of SP3 to fix it. can anyone tell me how to fix this problem or provided a link where i can get SP3 from? Ive spent most of the day on the phone to Adobe Support and they have been unable to provide me with a link to the service pack.

Username not showing up in access log for authenticated users

I'm using form-based authentication in a Java web application on Sun One Web Server v6.1 to restrict access to authenticated users. However, even after the users authenticate and access the application, the username field in the access log is showing them as anonymous.
request.getRemoteUser() is reporting the correct username, so it just seems to be the access log that is in error. Right now it is set to the default but changing formats to custom doesn't seem to help in displaying the username.
Here's an excerpt from the access log:
// anonymous access attempt, redirects to login page...
10.100.168.110 - - [01/May/2006:14:34:42 -0400] "GET /profile/index.jsp HTTP/1.1" 302 0
10.100.168.110 - - [01/May/2006:14:34:42 -0400] "GET /profile/login.jsp HTTP/1.1" 200 3355
10.100.168.110 - - [01/May/2006:14:34:47 -0400] "POST /profile/j_security_check HTTP/1.1" 302 0
// at this point they are logged in and their username should be reflected in the access log, but is not:
10.100.168.110 - - [01/May/2006:14:34:47 -0400] "GET /profile/index.jsp HTTP/1.1" 200 3532 And the relevant code from the web application's web.xml:
<security-constraint>
    <web-resource-collection>
      <web-resource-name>AllFiles</web-resource-name>
      <description>
                 Restricts anonymous access.
              </description>
      <url-pattern>/*</url-pattern>
      <http-method>POST</http-method>
      <http-method>GET</http-method>
    </web-resource-collection>
    <auth-constraint>
      <description>
               Authenticated Users
              </description>
      <role-name>user</role-name>
    </auth-constraint>
</security-constraint>I've searched the forums and the manuals but can't see anything showing that the access log's username field doesn't work with form-based authentication. Can anyone shed some light on this?

Some background:
The Java Servlet container has its own authentication infrastructure (which is what you configure in web.xml) which is separate from the non-Java authentication infrastructure (ACLs, etc.). If you set up authentication via ACLs the resulting user identity can (though you may configure it not to) propagate to the Java Servlet container such that request.getRemoteUser() will return it, even though no web.xml-driven authentication occurred. The coverse is not true, however: if you authenticate via a Java Realm, based on web.xml configuration, that user identity is not available to non-Java code.
(Your web.xml snippet doesn't show you using FORM auth - but it doesn't matter, the explanation above applies in any case.)
That is why the log file (generated from non-Java code) doesn't have access to that user. It probably should, but there's no config option today for you to make that happen.
If you're using BASIC auth you may consider moving the authentication configuration from web.xml to ACLs as a possible workaround. It will then show up in the access logs.
If you prefer web.xml-based authentication, consider the <SECURITY audit="true"> option in server.xml. It won't be in the access log but you'll have an audit trail of authentications, which may help.

Authenticated User not showing up in access log

Hello all,
I am trying to get authenticated users to show up in the access log of SunOne Web Server 6.1 SP4 and it doesn't work. It is a default paramter to show up in the access log but doesn't show in the log. In fact, when I set the log to only show the authenticated user in the log, the log is empty and only shows dashes. As you can in the part of the log file below, after the IP address the log should show the authenticated user but doesn't
Any help? Do I need to modify something else in a configuration file?
Thanks
Richard
10.64.8.62 - - [15/Jul/2007:00:42:28 +0200] "GET / HTTP/1.1" 200 202
10.64.8.62 - - [15/Jul/2007:00:43:43 +0200] "GET / HTTP/1.1" 200 202
10.64.8.62 - - [15/Jul/2007:00:44:58 +0200] "GET / HTTP/1.1" 200 202
10.64.8.62 - - [15/Jul/2007:00:46:14 +0200] "GET / HTTP/1.1" 200 202
10.64.8.62 - - [15/Jul/2007:00:47:29 +0200] "GET / HTTP/1.1" 200 202
10.64.8.62 - - [15/Jul/2007:00:48:44 +0200] "GET / HTTP/1.1" 200 202
10.64.8.62 - - [15/Jul/2007:00:49:59 +0200] "GET / HTTP/1.1" 200 202
10.65.1.63 - - [15/Jul/2007:00:51:14 +0200] "GET /Windchill/ HTTP/1.1" 200 402
10.65.1.63 - - [15/Jul/2007:00:51:15 +0200] "GET /Windchill/wtcore/js/com/ptc/core/ca/web/misc/content.js HTTP/1.1" 200 4132
10.65.1.63 - - [15/Jul/2007:00:51:15 +0200] "GET /Windchill/netmarkets/images/cut.gif HTTP/1.1" 200 104
10.65.1.63 - - [15/Jul/2007:00:51:15 +0200] "GET /Windchill/netmarkets/images/newdoc.gif HTTP/1.1" 200 215
10.65.1.63 - - [15/Jul/2007:00:51:15 +0200] "GET /Windchill/netmarkets/images/details.gif HTTP/1.1" 200 214
10.65.1.63 - - [15/Jul/2007:00:51:14 +0200] "GET /Windchill HTTP/1.1" 302 0
10.65.1.63 - - [15/Jul/2007:00:51:15 +0200] "GET /Windchill/netmarkets/javascript/util/calendar.js HTTP/1.1" 200 29580
10.65.1.63 - - [15/Jul/2007:00:51:15 +0200] "GET /Windchill/netmarkets/images/contract_comp.gif HTTP/1.1" 200 79
10.65.1.63 - - [15/Jul/2007:00:51:15 +0200] "GET /Windchill/netmarkets/images/newfoldertl.gif HTTP/1.1" 200 221
10.65.1.63 - - [15/Jul/2007:00:51:15 +0200] "GET /Windchill/netmarkets/images/ptclogo.gif HTTP/1.1" 200 1284
10.64.8.62 - - [15/Jul/2007:00:51:14 +0200] "GET / HTTP/1.1" 200 202

You didn't say how the server is authenticating the user. Is it succesful? ACLs or Java?
6.1sp4 is obsolete, update to the latest 6.1 service pack first. If you're using Java, I believe there was a bug years ago that was along the lines of your description. Update to the latest 6.1 service pack and if that doesn't solve the problem, provide more details on how the authentication is configured.

Authenticated user name not written to access log file

Our users are authenticated with certificates to an LDAP directory server. The Access log file is using the Extended-2 format.
The name of the authenticated user is now written in the Access log.
10.4.57.44 - - [19/May/2004:14:07:21 -0400] "GET /somepage HTTP/1.1" 200 10382
Anybody know why?

I've got the same problem with Sun Java System Web Proxy Server 4.02 for Linux.
When I installed it, authenticated users were visible in the access log. Then I tryied to change format and since that moment, this information is disappeared.
Any news about this bug?
Thanx.
G.

Authenticated Users & Users missing from Root

Hello,
Environment: MDT 2013, 2008 R2, Windows 7 x86. MDT is located on Windows 7 x86 and is not integrated with SCCM or WDS.
Process: Separate build, capture, and deployment task sequences.
Problem: After deployment the Authenticated Users and local Users are missing from the root (e.g., c:). The only security permissions assigned to the root are SYSTEM, domain account, Local Administrator.
This causes problems once joined to a domain due to the fact Authenticated Users have no permissions forcing a given user to have a temporary account. So far, only a partial workaround is identified and is undesirable in the long-run. The workaround
is to manually add Authenticated Users as well as the Local Users to the root and delete the domain account but the system will only allow partial inheritance through the file structure. Delete all entries for a particular user in the registry (e.g.,
PolicyGUID, ProfileGUID, ProfileList). Afterwards, log in to the machine with an account within the domain administrator group.
Additional information shows the registry Profilelist entries for a user maintains partial access with a value of 204; this includes the user and a domain account within the administrator group. The domain account present after deployment has a value
of 0. Two accounts have the expected value of 256 and they are the local and domain administrator account.
Also, if the same image is deployed using the PE environment the accounts are as they should be. The groups added are: Authenticated Users, Localmachine\Users, SYSTEM, Localmachine\Administrators.
The questions are: why would the Authenticated Users and Local Users accounts be missing? Why is the account used to deploy added?
Help is very appreciated, and thank you.

Hello, Nicholas the sysprep and capture is completed by a default template from MDT LTI sequence. The answer file used is the default provided by MDT. No attempt is made to capture from winpe because this simply negates the point of the MDT process.
However, applying the same image from winpe there are no permission issues and all the appropriate groups are assigned to the root.
With returning to the office this fine morning, I ran icacls on a machine:
C:\Users\Administrator>icacls c:\
c:\ No mapping between account names and security IDs was done.
(I)(OI)(CI)(F)
BUILTIN\Administrators:(I)(OI)(CI)(F)
NT AUTHORITY\SYSTEM:(I)(OI)(CI)(F)
Mandatory Label\High Mandatory Level:(OI)(NP)(IO)(NW)
Successfully processed 1 files; Failed processing 0 files
Thank you for the continued effort, Nicholas. With the additional icacls information I will delve into the general error provided.

Authenticated Users Group

As I understand the AU group is made up by any user that logs in. However, it does not work when I specify access to a TAB page so is only visible for AU. In this case the TAB is also available for the PUBLIC user.
I am working with Portal 3.0 EA on an Intel/NT plataform, my question is: is this the way that was supossed to be or it is something that has to do with the version that I am using...?
Thanks

I apologize. I don't think I explained myself correctly. Let's consider the following...
SERVER: SERVER1
DOMAIN: DOMAIN1
SHARE: \\SERVER1\SHARE1
SHARE PERMISSIONS: Authenticated Users - Full Control
Given the above information, is it possible that the Authenticated Users group will allow ONLY users that are defined on SERVER1 to access \\SERVER1\SHARE1?
My understanding is that's not possible. There's one defined Authenticated Users group and that represents ALL users that are authenticated against DOMAIN1, whether added to local groups, shares, etc.
What I'm being told however is that SHARE1 having Authenticated Users assigned is okay since only those user accounts defined on SERVER1 will be able to access it. All the users in the domain will NOT be able to access it. I think this is bogus. Am I wrong?
Nathon Dalton
Sr. Lead Developer
Blog: http://www.nathondalton.com

Authenticated Users Group Question

I have a quick question regarding the Authenticated Users "group". I used to be a systems administrator, but I'm a bit rusty since I've been a software developer for the last 10 years. A conflict with data center operations (DCO) group
at work lead me to get another opinion.
The question is this... is the authenticated users group a domain-level group or is there a local authenticated users group that would allow only users authenticated locally? We have a share that permits the authenticated users group access.
My opinion is that all domain users who have authenticated successfully have access to this share. The DCO group is telling me that this is the local (to the server containing the share of course) authenticated users group only.
Is there such a thing as a local-only authenticated users group? To me this doesn't even make sense, but I could very well be wrong.
Nathon Dalton
Sr. Software Engineer
Blog: http://nathondalton.wordpress.com

I apologize. I don't think I explained myself correctly. Let's consider the following...
SERVER: SERVER1
DOMAIN: DOMAIN1
SHARE: \\SERVER1\SHARE1
SHARE PERMISSIONS: Authenticated Users - Full Control
Given the above information, is it possible that the Authenticated Users group will allow ONLY users that are defined on SERVER1 to access \\SERVER1\SHARE1?
My understanding is that's not possible. There's one defined Authenticated Users group and that represents ALL users that are authenticated against DOMAIN1, whether added to local groups, shares, etc.
What I'm being told however is that SHARE1 having Authenticated Users assigned is okay since only those user accounts defined on SERVER1 will be able to access it. All the users in the domain will NOT be able to access it. I think this is bogus. Am I wrong?
Nathon Dalton
Sr. Lead Developer
Blog: http://www.nathondalton.com

Groups Authenticated users & Everyone difference

Hi Everyone,
There are builtin groups Authenticated users & Everyone. when i check for some iviews, folders, their permissions are set to Everyone with enduser as checked and for some objects, the permissions are given as Authenticated users group with enduser as checked.
What is the difference between these two. All the ESS/MSS objects has given the permission as Authenticated users group with Enduser checked.
anyone clarify this doubt.
Regards,
EP.

Hi,
There are two kinds of Properties for an Portal Content Object,
1. Administrator Permission- create/modify/read/ permissions etc privilatges on the object. These are Design Time Permissions
2. EndUser- When a user is assigned a end User Permission, he can view the content at runtime i.e. If the iView is assigned to the User (via iView assigned to a role, and role has an entry point and assigned to the user) and he has only the end user Permission, then he can login and view the runtime content only. A kind of end user privilage.
Now,
1. Authenticated Users: the Users who have entered their logon info/ used a certificate to Login to the Portal/ to say users who have authenticated themselves to Portal are the Authenticated Users. The User Group is named so.
2. Everyone- All the Users- Authenticated or not fall in this group. Sometimes Content can be accessed directly with a URL without any Logon.
Based on who can access the End user Content, the End User permission is provided in Permission settings, i.e.in the ACL of that Object.
Hope this answers your question. Reward points for Helpful answers.
Thanks,
Vamshi

Everyone Group vs. Authenticated Users Group

Two questions.....
1.) What is the difference between the "Everyone" group and the "Authenticated Users" group.
2) We are starting to use some new BI content (NW04s) in our federated portal and have found that we have to grant permissions to "Authenticated Users" instead of the "Everyone" group. Any ideas why?
Regards,
Diane

Diane,
The following asnwer is not a SAP answer but I did a quick check on our system and:
1. the difference between the group Everyone and Authenticated users is exactly 1 user assignment.. I looked further and see that it has to do with the J2EE_GUEST user. this user is member of the group Everyone but NOT of the group Authenticated users.
2. Can not give you a sure anser on this question but maybe it has to do with security that this is needed?!?!\
Hopfully another SDN community member can fill me in here...
Good luck and Kind Regards,
Benjamin Houttuin

Reg Authenticated Users Group

Hello Everyone.
We created two Roles Role1 and Role2 for this Roles we have assigned the Group "Authenticated Users"
Now the client requirement is they wants to remove couple of users who are assigned to Role1(who belong to "Authenticated Users" group.
Though it is not a good practise One thing I can do is search for the group "Authenticated Users" in portal then choose modify and choose assigned users and remove the users from this group.So,that they can not see Role1
If I remove the users from the group "Authenticated Users" then they will not be able to see Role2 as they are removed from the "Authenticated Users" group which is assigned to Role2
Can anyone help me out regarding this issue.

Hi Shailesh,
What you understood is correct ie "Both the users have been added to Role 1 and Role 2, and both the roles have been assigned to "Authenticated Group".
I tried the step what you have stated.
once I login to portal --- User administration -- identity management
search for the user.
choose modify
if I click on assigned roles I do not see either Role1 or Role2 under assigned roles
but if i click on assigned groups I see " Authenticated Users"
thanks in advance

On-Demand Process Running only for authenticated user

I have noticed that an on-demand process is running only for authenticated users - for example a download of a document. For public users it doesn't. I remember seeing a similar question related to ajax on demand in this forum but couldn't locate the thread. Does anyone knows why the process is not running for not authenticated user? The result of a download for a public user is a blank page where the authenticated user gets the file by clicking on the same link.
Thanks in advance,
Denes Kubicek
http://deneskubicek.blogspot.com/
http://htmldb.oracle.com/pls/otn/f?p=31517:1
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Hello Denes,
Please check if the following can help you -
Re: AJAX on public page
Re: Calling an application level on-demand process from JavaScript
Regards,
Arie.

Get authenticated user name (HTTP basic auth)

Hi.
How can I get the authenticated user name from a BPEL process when the service is protected with HTTP basic auth?
I'm running SOA Suite 11.1.1.5.
Thanks in advance.
Mick

Doh! Ok So I've added a SOAP Handler to automatically add the username and password for the HTTP Basic Auth.
All in all does this setup sound right?

5525 Authenticated User Access

We've just replaced our Fortinet Firewalls with 5525's but are struggling to get a feature working that worked great on the Fortinet firewall.
All our users use a proxy for internet access that's configured in IE but from time to time some users need to remove this proxy and go directly out to the internet, with the Fortinet devices we created a rule right at the bottom of the inside access out rule that had it authenticate users via TACACS which worked a treat and could be used from PC or laptop.
We want to do a similar thing on the 5525 and I thought the Authenticated user would give me this access but I don't seem to be able to get it to work. I've got the AD side of it working fine the ASA can pull user and groups from AD but I'm struggling to get this working for a user.
I've created a rule at the bottom of the inside access in ACL that has any source and any destination but has my AD user as a user in the rule but when I try and test it it doesn't work and when I have a look in monitoring it says no IP address associated with user.
I want to be able to pick and choose which users have this access.
How can I get this working the way I want it to?
Thanks
Jon

Hello Jonh,
Are you trying to authenticate users to allow them to go to the internet??? If this is the case cut-trough proxy is what you are looking for!!
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/vpndevc/ps2030/products_configuration_example09186a00807349e7.shtml
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps6120/products_tech_note09186a0080ba6110.shtml
Let me know if I understood your query,
Regards,
Julio

Extract authenticated user using CustomLoginModule

Hi All,
I'm trying to extract the authenticated user in a variable using my
CustomLoginModule. Please see if this will work:-
Code snippet:
NameCallback nameCallback = new NameCallback("User ID:");
try
callbackHandler.handle(new Callback[] {nameCallback});
catch (Exception e)
e.printStackTrace();
//receives the user name
userName = nameCallback.getName();
Please let me know if i get it right
Vaib

Hi Eric,
Please use the BASIC authentication method as follows:
<web-app>
<login-config>
<auth-method>BASIC</auth-method>
</login-config>
</web-app>
hope that helps!
AMN

Log the authenticated users

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for