trustedCertificates from LeshanServerBuilder doesn't allow subtypes of Certificate
See original GitHub issueProblem:
The field LeshanServerBuilder#trustedCertificates doesn’t allow to specify subtypes of Certificate
, I need to cast my types just to comply with value type.
Solution
Modify the field to type to allow subtypes of Certificate, one way could be to use List<? extends Certificate> trustedCertificates
.
We could keep backwards compatibility, in case this is viable, I can upload a pull request with the changes.
Issue Analytics
- State:
- Created 6 years ago
- Comments:11 (11 by maintainers)
Top Results From Across the Web
Chapter 73. Restricting an application to trust only a subset of ...
Forgetting to run the ipa-certupdate command after creating a sub-CA means that if the sub-CA certificate expires, end-entity certificates issued by the sub-CA ......
Read more >Spring tool suite- SunCertPathBuilderException: unable to find ...
I looked into web but could not find any clear solution for STS. How should I add certification path in STS for given...
Read more >Configuring the REST API by using SSL certificates
The primary reason for using Secure Sockets Layer (SSL) certificates is to keep sensitive information sent across the internet encrypted so ...
Read more >Jetty/Howto/Configure SSL - Eclipsepedia
4.1 Generating Keys and Certificates with JDK keytool ... However the browser will not trust the certificate you have generated, and will ...
Read more >Use mkcert to Trust Local Che Certificates - Eclipse Che Blog
The problem with untrusted TLS certificates. When Che SSL certificate is signed by an unknown CA, the certificate won't be trusted by the...
Read more >Top Related Medium Post
No results found
Top Related StackOverflow Question
No results found
Troubleshoot Live Code
Lightrun enables developers to add logs, metrics and snapshots to live code - no restarts or redeploys required.
Start FreeTop Related Reddit Thread
No results found
Top Related Hackernoon Post
No results found
Top Related Tweet
No results found
Top Related Dev.to Post
No results found
Top Related Hashnode Post
No results found
Top GitHub Comments
It seems there is no strong reason/opinion to go to collection for now. So let’s keep on array, if this little modification helps scala users. (even if this is a bit strange for java users as the 2 signatures seems to do the same thing in java)
This is not set in stone and could be changed later if needed. So I will merge #419 soon if there is no objection.
Fixed by #419