I'm aware of possible security issues but (a) there are use cases where security does not really matter; e.g. using remote dev to develop a quarkus app on a single-board computer (such as RPi) and (b) we could use the management interface with basic auth in order to secure the DevUI.
But looking at DevUIProcessor it seems that the routes produced are not marked as management routes. Is that intentional? CC @phillip-kruger
Implementation ideas
By default, the the DevUI could be disabled for remote dev mode unless the management interface is enabled.
We could also introduce a config knob to enable the DevUI for remote dev mode regardless of whether the management interface is used.
Description
DevUI was disabled for remote dev mode in https://github.com/quarkusio/quarkus/pull/15560 (old) and https://github.com/quarkusio/quarkus/pull/32837 (new). However, I think that it's a very useful feature and it should be re-added in order to make the remote dev mode more usable.
I'm aware of possible security issues but (a) there are use cases where security does not really matter; e.g. using remote dev to develop a quarkus app on a single-board computer (such as RPi) and (b) we could use the management interface with basic auth in order to secure the DevUI.
But looking at
DevUIProcessor
it seems that the routes produced are not marked as management routes. Is that intentional? CC @phillip-krugerImplementation ideas
By default, the the DevUI could be disabled for remote dev mode unless the management interface is enabled.
We could also introduce a config knob to enable the DevUI for remote dev mode regardless of whether the management interface is used.