Tim Holloway wrote:If I was to assert that my configuration was perfect, I'd have managed to mis-capitalize something, transpose 2 characters (preferably something narrow like "ii" so it's hard to see) or done something otherwise blatantly wrong that would take me 3 days to spot or 5 minutes for someone who didn't "know" what was there. This is because machines in general and computers specifically delight in making me look like an idiot.
Tim Holloway wrote:There are no bugs I know of in the Glassfish security system. You might have missed configuring something in sun-web.xml, but you didn't provide a copy of that file.
Tim Holloway wrote:It may not be important, because the most likely explanation is that you haven't mapped the role named "admin" to the user ID "archimage" in your Realm authentication and authorization "database". If that relationship doesn't exist, then the "503" page is exactly what users would see, ubless you replaced it with a custom "You can't do that - you're not authorized" message page of your own design.
Tim Holloway wrote:Actually, the downside of detailed logs is that obvious tends to get buried. I asked because I saw an explicit login request in code and it's unfortunately common that people think that user-written "security" systems can make use of the web.xml config info designated for use by the container security system,
Tim Holloway wrote:One thing that is missing from your example, I believe, is the "catch" part of the "try" block around your login code and a print of the stacktrace that would have been captured at that point.
Tim Holloway wrote:It may not be important, because the most likely explanation is that you haven't mapped the role named "admin" to the user ID "archimage" in your Realm authentication and authorization "database". If that relationship doesn't exist, then the "503" page is exactly what users would see, ubless you replaced it with a custom "You can't do that - you're not authorized" message page of your own design.