Now that CodeFluent Entities blog has disappeared, and after the refurbishing of the SoftFluent site, there is no more documentation available for this framework?
How it's supposed to get information about, let me say, ASP.NET Identities, jwt, aspects, templates and all that valuable information at the blog?
And what about all those we have projects tied to this platform?
https://www.softfluent.com/documentation/ is still available.
The blog was discontinued because too many of its articles relate to obsolete technologies but were considered by some in the public as up to date view or as valid recommendations even in nowadays context not considering their publishing dates. In 2018 it generated too many support by itself and it was decided to put it as private and provide answers to customers through support for those having support licenses or through StackOverflow only.
SoftFluent supports existing customers through their support program if they have one ( fixes, VS2019 support, questions on their usage/code, link to specific blog article if accurate or with comments).
Existing licenses are still valid, including Free and Personal.
Specific question can still be answered through this StackOverflow channel by the community of its users and sometimes support.
Related
What technical detail should programmers consider while developing their own oAuth service?
Have been trying to find out guidelines, but found most of the oAuth related articles discuss as a consumer point of view (i.e. how to consume others service). I want to design my own oAuth system with my authorization service and resource service. What technical detail should I follow?
You probably have read the RFCs but just in case you haven't, they're the place you want to start:
oAuth 2.0 "core" (RFCs 6749 and 6750)
Proof Key for Code Exchange (PKCE) (RFC 7636)
The best 'packaged' guidance for oAuth implementers (client or otherwise) is available via IETF Best Current Practices (BCPs). Most people know about IETF RFCs and (confusingly) BCPs are published as RFCs with a RFC number. Despite that, they're best practices and not formal specifications:
The BCP process is similar to that for proposed standards. The BCP is
submitted to the IESG for review, and the existing review process
applies, including a "last call" on the IETF announcement mailing
list. However, once the IESG has approved the document, the process
ends and the document is published. The resulting document is viewed as having the
technical approval of the IETF, but it is not, and cannot become an official Internet Standard.
BCPs you want to review:
oAuth security (up to date as of this writing)
oAuth for browser-based apps (up to date as of this writing).
oAuth for native apps (published in 2017 as an update to "core" oAuth 2.0 RFC, still a good read)
JSON Web Tokens for oAuth (up to date)
These documents are framed in threat model terms - they cover attacks (or "security considerations" as a diluted format) and countermeasures. You might be looking for a more straightforward building blocks type of a roadmap and perhaps there should be one as an educational tool. Real-world oAuth implementations must be developed with a prima facie evidence of a threat model.
As one samurai said: ...swordsmanship untested in battle is like the art of swimming mastered on land.
I would also be interested to hear why you want to develop your own auth solution.
But putting that aside, there is an open source project that does exactly what you ask - Identity Server. You can check out their source code or fork it and build something on top of it.
Also, please check "identigral" answer on various docs.
PSD2, The Payment Services Directive of the EU.
Financial institutions in the EU need to be PSD2 compliant, and there's a bunch of vendors claiming PSD2 compliancy. PSD2 is supposed to be a uniform EU-wide standard, and there's a million whitepapers, video blogs, impact estimates, high level overviews, but no technical specification.
Nothing saying really what message needs to be sent where and then happens what. The closest thing I found is this but even there there's no reference, nothing to imply what exact technical spec they followed.
Does anybody know where to get the official PSD2 technical requirements?
EDIT: I tried my luck with the developers of openbanking project
PS I understand that this question is technically a "questions asking us to recommend or find a book, tool, software library, tutorial or other off-site resource are off-topic for Stack Overflow as they tend to attract opinionated answers and spam"
This question must have a unique and precise answer from a single regulator - the EC, this is not an opinionated answers area.
Here is the UK standard.
https://www.openbanking.org.uk
Also there is a linkedin group to connect developers working on PSD2 and Openbanking with banks, regulators and suppliers here.
https://www.linkedin.com/groups/12069802
I got an answer from the "owner" of the OBP project, I'm posting it verbatim:
Regarding the current status, Open Bank Project API develop branch currently supports OBP API specs 1.2.1 through 3.0.0
We also have an ISO20022 connector (PAIN) for initiating payments.
You can read the OBP specs here:
https://apiexplorersandbox.openbankproject.com/
or use the Swagger:
https://apisandbox.openbankproject.com/obp/v1.4.0/resource-docs/v3.0.0/swagger
or Resource Docs (our own format):
https://apisandbox.openbankproject.com/obp/v1.4.0/resource-docs/v3.0.0/obp
(the Swagger / Resource Doc links can also be found at the bottom of the API Explorer)
Regarding PSD2, PSD2 doesn't explain exactly how countries should comply (e.g. it doesn't define URLs etc.). However, it does say in Article 28 point 3: "Account servicing payment service providers shall also ensure that the dedicated interface uses ISO 20022 elements, components or approved message definitions, for financial messaging".
This is why STET (the recent French standard) uses field names like "PmtTpInf", "InstrPrty", "SvcLvl" and "Cd" etc.
In addtion to the OBP standards mentioned above, we aim to support:
An ISO 20022 version of OBP. This will most likely be requested using a different Mime type on the current OBP URLs and will be implemented as an automatic translation of OBP terms to ISO20022 equivelents (where they exist). We'll probably support ISO20022 short field names and also longer type names (which are verbose but are more self describing).
UK Open Banking standard
STET (French)
Other Country standards.
Thus OBP API will be able to surface multiple standards using one OBP instance and backend connector. It will provide easy to use REST APIs (OBP) and less easy to read ISO20022 interfaces for compliance.
Hope that helps.
p.s. here is STET: https://www.stet.eu/assets/files/PSD2/API-DSP2-STET_V1.2.2.pdf
If you are looking for a technical standard that is intended to be applicable across all PSD2 countries, you should check out the Berlin Group spec.
The Open Banking spec is somewhat UK specific, it might be sufficient if you only need to support UK market, or you could extend it to support other products/markets (e.g. SEPA payments).
I've been looking for an answer to this question myself, hoping that I'll find a PSD2-compliant JSON-based answer, rather than have to figure out ISO20022.
I found this brilliant article by Starling Bank saying:
As of November 2017, however, the Open Banking Implementation Entity (OBIE) announced amendments to the scope of Open Banking to broaden out the Open Banking solution to include PSD2 items “in order to deliver a fully compliant PSD2 solution” – which can be read in full here and here.
It seems to me that if Open Banking is designed to be PSD2-compliant and it already delivers detailed specs, then the safest bet here is to simply implement Open Banking specs.
I've also found that viable alternatives to this are:
The Berlin Group's NextGenPSD2 specs, published as a YAML file.
The Stet specs, also published as a YAML file.
The text of PSD2 is here: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32018R0389&from=DE
I found this from here: https://raue.com/en/e-commerce-2/new-eu-regulation-for-electronic-payments-and-online-banking/ which has a helpful summary.
PSD2 is the interface requirement, I don't understand why so many of the responses are about Open Banking, which is just about how to use the interface!
The specs rely a lot on JWTs I found this website very useful if it helps anyone - https://openbankingsdk.com
I can only find and download OSGi Specs(e.g. core-spec, enterprise-spec) from its website. What about so-called OSGi RFCs? Are they publicly accessable, and how related to the Specs? Thanks!
From this osgi.org page:
Each Expert Group works on items defined in documents known as Requests for Proposals (RFPs), which set the requirements for the technical development.
RFPs may be created by anyone but are always reviewed by the Requirements Committee to ensure they meet real-world needs and complement the larger objectives of the OSGi Alliance.
Assuming the RFP is accepted, the relevant Expert Group develops Requests for Comments (RFCs), which define the technical solution to the RFP.
The Expert Group also develops Reference Implementations and Test Cases to support the RFC where this is appropriate.
The Member Area of the OSGi web site contains much more information and detail on specific activities, including drafts and final versions of RFPs and RFCs, final but pre-release versions of specifications and other technical documents, minutes, schedules and calendars of Expert Group meetings, and other important information. This information is only available to members.
So only the members can access those RFCs.
Regarding "draft specifications":
From time to time the expert groups of the OSGi Alliance publish some draft RFCs under a special license (the Distribution and Feedback License) for a public review in order to receive comments from non-OSGi members and other organisations.
The download page to access these draft specs is http://www.osgi.org/Specifications/Drafts .
To keep the RFCs non-public was a decision to protect the IPR as well as to keep the resulting specifications as unconfusing as possible. Sometimes one or more RFCs are combined into one specification, sometimes an RFC amends an existing spec. The RFCs are basically work-in-progress.
There are some RFCs the OSGi Alliance decided to publish. Those are the ones you can access. One example is RFC 112 Bundle Repository. This is a stand-alone spec, which is complete in itself.
I am part of a growing software project with at least 200 active developer in 10 locations. I would like to set up an on-line chat forum for developers because I think it would help to coordinate efforts. We have an email mailing list but I feel like some questions or announcements are too informal to send to everyone while mentioning it in a chat forum might be a useful community resource.
I have never participated in a software project that used an on-line chat forum so I would like to hear about peoples experiences. I am particularly interested in technical issues: Use of IRC vs. alternative platforms; how to manage access, eg. for developers only, allowing users to participate; the value of requiring certain announcements to be made on the chat forum eg who is resolving broken builds etc.
If I pitch the idea to the community I would like to have some good arguments why it would be a good idea and some prospective of its usefulness in other software projects.
The features you MOST want for such informal discussions are:
persistance (I have't used IRC in >decade, does it persist chats that you missed?)
Searcheability
Classification (tagging) to help sort through the stuff.
Considering those 3, I'd strongly suggest some sort of discussion software (microblog, Wiki, forum) with RSS feed.
It's a great platform for informal discussions. It's flexible, users can self-organize and its extensible. We have tied CI build results and SCM commits. Further, given the availability of multiple consumption streams (web, terminal) anyone can join with little notice.
I think the previous poster is over-stating the importance of the contents of this conversation and who the heck wants to maintain discussion software? Blergh.
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 10 years ago.
The company I work for is wanting to add blog functionality to our website and they were looking to spend an awful amount of money to have some crap being built on top of a CMS they purchased (sitecore). I pointed them to Telligent's Community Server and we had a sales like meeting today to get the Marketing folks on board.
My question is if anyone has had issues working with Community Server, skinning it and extending it?
I wanted to explain a bit why I am thinking Community Server, the company is wanting multiple blogs with multiple authors. I want to be out of the admin part of this as much as possible and didn't think there were too many engines that having multiple blogs didn't mean db work. I also like the other functionality that Community Server provides and think the company will find it useful, particularly the media section as right now we have some really shotty way of dealing with whitepapers and stuff.
edit: We are actually using the Sitecore blog module for a single blog on our intranet (which is actually what the CMS is serving). Some reasoning for why I don't like it for our public site are they are on different servers, it doesn't support multiple authors, there is no built in syndication, it is a little flimsy feeling to me from looking at the source and I personally think the other features of Community Server make its price tag worth it.
another edit: Need to stick to .net software that run on sql server in my company's case, but I don't mind seeing recommendations for others. ExpressionEngine looks promising, will try it out on my personal box.
I've done quite a few projects using Community Server. If you're okay with the out-of-the-box functionality, or you don't mind sticking to the version you start with, I think you'll be very happy.
The times I've run into headaches using CS is when the client wants functionality CS does not provide, but also insists on keeping the ability to upgrade to the latest version whenever Telligent releases an update. You can mostly support that by making all of your changes either in a separate project or by only modifying aspx/ascx files (no codebehinds). Some kind of merge is going to be required though no matter how well you plan it out.
Community Server itself has been very solid for me, but if all you need is a blogging engine then it may be overkill. Skinning it, for example, is quite a bit of work (despite their quite powerful Chameleon theme engine).
I'd probably look closer at one of the dedicated blog engines out there, like BlogEngine.NET, dasBlog or SubText, if that's all you need. Go with Community Server if you think you'll want more "community-focused" features like forums etc.
You can also take a look at Telligent Graffiti CMS.
http://graffiticms.com/
It supports multiple blogs and authors.
Update: It's now open source and available at http://graffiticms.codeplex.com/
Community Server 2008.5 lets you add several members that can post articles. Also with
Community Server 2008.5 you now have wiki's along with forums and the blogs. This probably has one of the better web based admin control panel's I seen in a while. This let's you easily change several things including the site's theme (or skin). To me it is one of the most scalable applications I have seen in a while. We are using it for our site http://knowledgemgmtsolutions.com.
Skinning is pretty straightforward, and the sidebar widgets aren't very difficult to create (if you don't mind building controls in code). The widgets also allow options for the users to customize them in the control panel very easily. I doubt you'll find a strong community of widget builders for Community Server however. Nothing compared to the dev community for blogs like wordpress.
I recommend starting templates from scratch and adding in CS controls as needed, to get the markup you prefer for styling and to use only what you need.
Setting up different roles for users to post to different blogs is also very easy and requires no coding. You can have blog groups, and allow only certain users to post to certain blogs.
Sitecore's Forum module is powered by Community Server and integrated with Sitecore CMS.
Expression Engine with the Multi-Site Manager works great for that kind of situation.
Have you had a look at the Shared Source blog module for Sitecore?