JMS question

[Timber Lee]

which of following are not suitable for jms?
1.transaction
2.security

[Chris Mathews]

Depending on the context, I would say both could be suitable.

[Naichen Liu]

For security, answer is not suitable, here is the quote from JMS1.02 Spec section 2.7
"JMS does not provide features for controlling or configuring message integrity or message privacy. It is expected that many JMS providers will provide such features. It is also expected that configuration of these services will be handled by provider-specific administration tools. Clients will get the proper security configuration as part of the administered objects they use."
For transaction, I am not sure, since JMS has a concept of "transacted session" which "groups a set of produced messages and a set of consumed messages into an atomic unit of work."
but in Spec section 1.4.4
"A JMS client may use JTA to delimit distributed transactions; however, this is a function of the transaction environment the client is running in. It is not a feature of JMS per se."

[Chris Mathews]

Originally posted by Naichen Liu:
For security, answer is not suitable
JMS is just as secure as anything else... which is as secure as you make it. There is nothing in JMS that is inheritantly insecure and not suitable for secure communications.
Is EJB "secure"? Is IIOP "secure"? The answer is: not by and of themselves. Of course, EJB and IIOP can be secured with the help of other technologies... so can JMS.