Call M3 API from MEC process

I had a requirement for one of my customers to call M3 API in Infor M3 Enterprise Collaborator (MEC) specifically from a custom process – not from a mapping – and I realized MEC does not have any built-in process for that, so I reverse engineered MEC again, and here is what I found.

Let’s see what MEC has to call M3 API from a process; I am using MEC version 11.4.1.


The Partner Admin has the following built-in processes:

According to their Java source code, none of these processes calls M3 API, at least not that allow the user to call any M3 API arbitrarily; that does not meet my requirement.

API reference holders

There is a list of API reference holders in Partner Admin > Manage > Communication > M3 API:

They are used by the mappings in the XML Transform processes to select the M3 API server at run time:

I can get these properties with the following code with ec-core-


APIReferenceHolder instance = APIReferenceHolder.getInstance();
List<APIRef> apiRefs = instance.getAPIRefs();
for (APIRef r: apiRefs) {
    String id = r.getId();
    String hostName = r.getHostName();
    String portNumber = r.getPortNumber();
    String username = r.getUsername();
    String password_ = r.getPassword();
    String encodingIANA = r.getEncodingIANA();
    boolean proxyUsage = r.isProxyUsage();
    String refName = r.getRefName();
    List<String> agreements = r.getAgreements();


Note: APIReferenceHolder will run an SQL to table PR_Basic_Property in the MEC database with PR_Basic_Group_Type.Type=’APIRef’:

MEC Mapper

The MEC Mapper (a.k.a. ION Mapper) can call M3 API, and there are settings for design time:
5____ 8__

But I am not interested in the Mapper for my requirement, so I will skip this.

Properties *

The MEC server has properties about M3 API in the groups APIMapper and MvxAPI:

I can get these values with the technique of my previous post:

import java.util.Properties;

Properties props = PropertiesSourceFactory.getInstance().getProperties();
// APIMapper
String name = props.getProperty("");
String host = props.getProperty("");
String port = props.getProperty("APIMapper.mi.port");
String user = props.getProperty("APIMapper.mi.user");
String password = props.getProperty("APIMapper.mi.password");
// MvxAPI
String enabled = props.getProperty("MvxAPI.Pool.Enabled");
String max = props.getProperty("MvxAPI.Pool.Connection.Max");
String expires = props.getProperty("MvxAPI.Pool.Connection.Expires");
String timeout = props.getProperty("MvxAPI.Pool.Connection.Connect.TimeOut");

Good. I will use APIMapper.

Connection pool

There is also a connection pool, which is recommended for repeated calls, but I have not yet looked into it as it appears to be used only by the Mapper:

I found this code in

APIPool apiPool = APIPool.getInstance();
MetaAPI.getAPI(manifest, apiEncoding);
apiPool.getAPI(programName, host, port, user, password, isProxy, manifest, encoding, CONO, DIVI);
List<APIPoolInfo> list = apiPool.getAPIPoolInfo();

For future work.

MvxSockJ *

There is the good old M3 API Java library MvxSockJ-6.1.jar in the MEC server library folder:

Refer to the M3 API Toolkit documentation for its complete usage. Here is the minimalist version:

import MvxAPI.MvxSockJ;

MvxSockJ s = new MvxSockJ();
s.mvxConnect(host, port, user, password, "CRS610MI", CONO);
s.mvxSetField("CUNO", "ACME");

Good. I will use this.

Remember to check for nulls and return codes.

EBZSocket et al.

There are plenty of other Java classes in MEC that are related to M3 API, they lead to EBZSocket, but they seem to be used mostly by the mapper, and they require knowledge of the M3 API metadata. I have not looked more into it. Here is a screenshot of the dependency graph from JArchitect:

Here is some code I found, to be tested:


//APICaller ac = new APICaller(poolKey, strUUID, apiEncoding);
APICaller ac = new APICaller(pgm, host, port, user, password, strUUID, apiEncoding, forcedProxy, company, division);
int connectionTimeout = 10000;
int readTimeout = 10000;
ac.initMISock(connectionTimeout, readTimeout);
int startPos = 0;
int maxLength = 28;
String data = "GetBasicData 106AAACRBE01";
ac.setRecord(startPos, maxLength, data);



EBZSocket sock = new EBZSocket(strUUID, host, Integer.parseInt(port), "EBZSocket", apiEncoding);
String logonStr = "";
sock.mvxLogOn(logonStr, user, password, library, pgm, connectionTimeout, readTimeout, forceProxy);
sock.mvxSend(char[] apiData, int dataLength)

For future work too.


There does not seem to be a built-in solution to call any M3 API in a process in MEC. However, we can get the existing server properties – either from the API reference holders, either from the property group APIMapper – and use the good old MvxAPI.MvxSockJ to call the M3 API. Now you can add that to your custom process. With some more work, we could perhaps also use the connection pool, and explore more of the remaining Java classes.

I highlighted my favorite with an asterisk.

That’s it!

Thanks for reading. If you liked this, please consider subscribing, give a like, leave a comment, share around you, and help us write the next post.

Get MEC properties

I need to programmatically get the properties of Infor M3 Enterprise Collaborator (MEC). How?


At some point I found, but I do not remember if that worked or not.

I could not quickly find a solution, and eventually I found the Module MecUIServer’s Local Management Pages (ServerPropertiesPage):

I decompiled it, and I learned it uses

So that’s the answer to get the MEC properties:

import java.util.Properties;

Properties props = PropertiesSourceFactory.getInstance().getProperties();
props.getProperty("mec.central.file.path"); // D:/Infor/MECDEV

Remember to check for null.

I am now using the properties I need in my mappings and custom processes.

That’s it. Thanks for reading. Please subscribe, like, share.

Rich HTML output from MEC

Here is a technique to give custom, rich, interactive, and user-friendly HTML responses to the users of Infor M3 Enterprise Collaborator (MEC), instead of giving them classic HTML, XML, or email responses.


MEC is an EAI tool that takes input messages, processes them, and produces output messages. I will only focus on interactive scenarios where the user needs an immediate response from MEC. I will only focus on the HTTP channels of MEC. I will assume we already have a request, and I will only focus on the HTML response. So this is a pretty specific scope of use. Note I have not been to a MEC training so my results by trial and error may not be optimal.

Classic responses

Canned response

By default, the HTTPIn channel of MEC produces this minimalist HTML response, with no piece of identifiable data about what it is referring to, no explanation of what “successfully processed” means – there could actually be a failure behind – it is just a basic acknowledgment of receipt, misspelled:

e-Collaborator HTTP Reply
The request was succesfully processed

Custom XML response

With the HTTPSyncIn + HTTPSyncOut channels we can produce a custom response, typically in XML because MEC is XML-centric. In there, we can put identifiable data, and a detailed explanation. I illustrated this scenario in my previous post HTTP channels in MEC (part 3). But XML is not user-friendly thus not suitable for users.

Email response

Many developers setup their MEC agreements to send responses as emails to their users. However, 1) if a user takes an action that merits an immediate response from MEC, receiving an email disrupts the user context, 2) sending emails worsens mailbox pollution, 3) and most email clients block HTML and JavaScript features, thus thwarting interactivity. I prefer to show an HTML page as the primary confirmation, and optionally the email as the secondary confirmation.

Desired HTML response

My desired response is dynamic HTML from MEC. To it, I will add images and CSS for beautification, and JavaScript to manipulate the page dynamically. I will reflect the input identifiers onto the output as a feedback loop for the user. I will craft a format that is easy for the user to understand. I will put a detailed message of the processing’s result. And I will add buttons for the user to interact with the result in M3. Here is my example:

Here is my desired dynamic HTML output from MEC. I recommend using HTML5 instead of HTML4 to avoid the quirks:

<!DOCTYPE html>
     <title>MEC response</title>
     <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="http://host1623:22107/mne/Test.css" />
     <img src="http://host1623:22107/mne/Test.png" alt="Test" />
     Company: <span id="CONO">910</span>
     Customer: <span id="CUNO">ACME</span>
     Customer added successfully to M3.
     <input id="btn" type="button" value="Open in CRS610/B" />
     <script type="text/javascript" src="http://host1623:22107/mne/Test.js"></script>

Note: for an explanation of that /mne/ path, see the chapter further below about static files.

Here is my static CSS file, Test.css:

body { font-family: sans-serif }
span { font-weight: bold }

Here is my static JavaScript code, Test.js. It opens the customer record in CRS610/B. For that, it uses the Infor Smart Office Installation Point URL, the task parameter [1] and an MForms Bookmark URI [2]:

btn.addEventListener("click", function () {
   var CONO = document.getElementById("CONO").innerText;
   var CUNO = document.getElementById("CUNO").innerText;
   var isoUrl = "http://host1762:22107/mango/MangoClient.application?server=https://host1762:22108";
   var bookmarkUri = "mforms://bookmark/?program=CRS610&tablename=OCUSMA&keys=" + encodeURIComponent(["OKCONO", CONO, "OKCUNO", CUNO]);
   var url = isoUrl + "&task=" + encodeURIComponent(bookmarkUri);, "_blank");

Note 1: You can use anchors <a> instead of buttons if you prefer.

Note 2: You can replace Smart Office by H5 Client if you prefer.

Unsuccessful attempts

I originally tried to produce the HTML output directly from MEC Mapper.

For that, I imported the XHTML 1.0 Strict XML Schema, but MEC Mapper tripped on <xs:import schemaLocation=”…xml.xsd”/>:

I removed it from the XSD and tried again, but then MEC Mapper tripped on <xs:attributeGroup ref>:

I removed them all from the XSD and tried again, but then MEC Mapper added the document elements as a recursive list of all the possible elements and attributes of HTML, even the ones I did not need and the optional ones, with no flexibility to change:

Instead, I created a minimalist XSD for my sample HTML, but MEC Mapper deleted the values of my attributes, even if I enforced them in the XSD <xs:attribute>:

Then I tried to restore my attribute values with a Java function, but that quickly became un-maintainable for a large HTML document with frequent changes:

And each time I change the XSD, I have to do the cycle of delete/un-publish/save/generate/publish/add/reload/activate [3], and it is too overwhelming for short development cycles.

Too complicated.



Back to XML

I will revert my mapping back to XML output:

Here is the desired XML output:

<?xml version="1.0"?>

As usual, to create the XSD, I use Microsoft SDK’s xsd.exe, I remove the Byte Order Mark (BOM), I remove the NewDataSet, and I import the resulting XSD in MEC Mapper.

Here is the output in MEC Mapper:

The result will be XML.

XSL Transform

I will use XSL Transformations (XSLT) to transform the XML into HTML. For that, create the XSLT file with your favorite editor, go to Partner Admin > Manage, and add an XSLT Definition:

Then go to your agreement > Processes, add an XSL Transform process between XML Transform and Send, and set it to the XSLT Definition:

Here is a subset of my XSLT (the complete version includes the rest of the HTML):

<?xml version="1.0"?>
<xsl:stylesheet version="1.0" xmlns:xsl="">
<xsl:output method="html" doctype-system="about:legacy-compat" encoding="UTF-8" indent="yes" omit-xml-declaration="yes" />
   <xsl:template match="/response">
         Company: <xsl:value-of select="CONO" />
         Customer: <xsl:value-of select="CUNO" />
            <xsl:when test="result='OK'">Customer added successfully to M3.</xsl:when>
            <xsl:otherwise>Error: <xsl:value-of select="result" /></xsl:otherwise>

The result will be HTML.

Note 1: I use a choose-when-otherwise to display the success and error message differently.

Note 2: I set the xsl:output properties like doctype and omit-xml-declaration in the XSLT file itself, because if I set them in the XSL Transform process properties in Partner Admin then there is no or an incorrect effect (MEC bug?).


Set the Send process in the agreement to Content-type text/html:

Static files

As per the basic rules of web pages, I will make the CSS and JavaScript external, with the CSS at the top and scripts at the bottom.

We can put the static files (images, CSS, JavaScript) on any web server of our choice. I did not find a generic web server in MEC, so for now I put the files in the M3 UI Adapter (MUA) folder at \\host1623\D:\Infor\LifeCycle\?\grid\?\grids\?\applications\M3_UI_Adapter\webapps\mne\, and the files are now accessible at http꞉//host1623:22107/mne/ (I will move them to a sub-folder later):

Note: I had originally put the files in the Smart Office MangoServer webapp that serves the ISO Installation Point (IP) at \\host1762\D:\Infor\LifeCycle\?\grid\?\grids\?\applications\MangoServer\Client\IP\ but the server returned the JavaScript as an attachment, and the browser downloaded the JavaScript file instead of executing it. So I moved them to the mne folder which returns the correct content type.
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=Test.js
Content-Type: application/x-download

Content-Type: application/x-javascript

Then, set the URLs accordingly in the HTML:

<link  href="http://host1623:22107/mne/Test.css".../>
<img    src="http://host1623:22107/mne/Test.png".../>
<script src="http://host1623:22107/mne/Test.js".../>


You can now test the result. MEC will produce XML and will use XSLT to transform the XML into HTML, the browser will get the HTML and will follow the links to get the static files and render the result, and the user will see a nice HTML page that it can interact with.

Here is the result for one of my customers, and it is coming straight from MEC; users love it, they can click on the links to open the records in Smart Office, they can print it, save it as PDF, etc.:

What about you

If you have an existing MEC mapping/agreement that produces XML, and you want to get this HTML solution:

  1. Create the static files (images, CSS, JavaScript) and place them somewhere in a web server
  2. Create the XSLT file that transforms the XML into HTML, set the URL of the static files accordingly, and add the XSLT to the Partner Admin > XSLT Definitions
  3. Add an XSL Transform process to your agreement (between XML Transform and Send), and set the Send content type to text/html

There is nothing to change in the MEC mapping. There is no server to reload.


With this design we have separation of concerns between data, presentation, and control, and it is easier to maintain than my original idea to do HTML output from the mapping:

  • XML: maintain the XML as usual in MEC Mapper
  • Static files (images, CSS, JavaScript): update the files with your favorite editors, and save them directly to the file system
  • XSLT/HTML: update the file with your favorite editor, save directly to the file system, and update the XSLT Definition
  • XSLT Definition: in the Partner Admin, delete the XSL Transform from the agreement and save it, select the new XSLT file in the XSLT Definition, re-add the XSL Transform to the agreement and save

Each step can be maintained individually by the same developer or by separate developers.

Note: MEC is not collaborative for developers, so if two developers are working on the same agreement in MEC Partner Admin (e.g. one maintaining the XML Transform, the other maintaining the XSL Transform) then the agreement will be corrupted.

Future work

There is more work to be done:

  • Move the static files to another web server (who knows what will happen to the mne folder with upgrades of M3)
  • Select the environment dynamically for the Smart Office Installation Point (DEV, TST, PRD)
  • Set the text to the local language (English, Swedish, French, etc.)
  • Get the column headings (CONO, CUNO, etc.) from the M3 language constants using the M3 translate API [4] instead of hard-coding the values
  • Implement the Post/Redirect/Get pattern to avoid duplicate form submission when users click the back button, and to not sanction users that save the page in the browser bookmarks
  • For easy cross-reference to the MEC Management log files, output the manifest UUID to the XML output using the Java method“UUID”), and add a link to it in the HTML with the href to https://host1764:22108/grid/ui/
  • One time I received the error “Internet Explorer has modified this page to help prevent cross-site scripting” (it is related to the same origin policy of browsers), but I have not been able to reproduce it. Otherwise it is working fine with my URLs spread across three hosts. To be troubleshot.


That was my solution for MEC to give custom, rich, interactive, and user-friendly HTML responses to the users. This is useful where the user needs an immediate response. All you have to do is add the XSL Transform and the static files without touching the existing mapping. In most of the cases, the classic responses – canned response, XML, or email – are sufficient.

That’s it! Special thanks to my colleague Sheryll Limmex for the help with the MEC mapping.

What solution did you design? Let me know in the comments below.

More interfaces

If you need to integrate Infor M3 with any of the following interfaces, here are most of the interfaces with which I have worked in the past two years for which I have not posted anything on this blog yet, and for which I may be able to help you if you have questions (contact me here). For that, I used a variety of Enterprise Collaborator, Smart Office scripts, and other code.

Also, check-out the other interfaces I have worked with.

Custom message process in MEC

Here is an unofficial guide on how to create a custom message process in Infor M3 Enterprise Collaborator (MEC).

What is a message process?

A message process in MEC is one of the steps in a process flow. Technically speaking, it is a Java class that reads a stream of bytes as an input, does some processing on it, and writes a stream of bytes as an output, for example transform a flat file to XML, apply XSLT to an XML, remove an envelope, archive the message, or make a SOAP request. Message processes are chained together in a partner agreement in the Partner Admin Tool.



The Partner Admin Tool User Guide has some information about message processes:

Java classes

The message processes are Java classes located in MEC’s core library:


Each message process is a Java class in package

Each message process may have a configuration dialog box in package 3


The message processes are declared in the MEC database in table PR_Process:

Java code

To create your own message process follow these steps:

  1. Use the following skeleton Java code, fill with your code, set the file extension for the output message (in my example it is .something), use the in input and out output streams to process the message as you need, and eventually use the cat logger to write debug info in the log file:
    package somewhere;
    import org.apache.log4j.Category;
    public class SomeProcess extends AbstractProcess {
      private static Category cat = Category.getInstance(SomeProcess.class.getName());
      public String getState() {
        return "SomeProcess";
      public boolean hasOutput() {
        return true;
      public String getFileExtension() {
        return ".something";
      public void process(InputStream in, OutputStream out) throws ProcessException {
        // your code here"processing...");

    Note: I do not have a sample code for the dialog box, but you can get inspiration from one of the existing classes in package

  2. Compile the Java code with:
    javac -extdirs D:\Infor\LifeCycle\host\grid\M3\grids\M3\applications\MECSRV\MecServer\lib\
  3. Copy the resulting Java class to the classpath of the MEC server and Partner Admin Tool, in the folder corresponding to the package (in my case it was package somewhere):
    D:\Infor\MECTOOLS\Partner Admin\classes\somewhere\SomeProcess.class

    Note: You can probably also put the Java class in a JAR file; to be tested.

  4. In the MEC database, add the process to the PR_Process table, where ?? is a new ID, for example 27:
    INSERT INTO MECDBDEV.dbo.PR_Process (ID, Name, Description, ConfigurationClass, WorkClass, Standard) VALUES (??, 'Thibaud Process', 'My custom message process', null, 'somewhere.SomeProcess', 1)
  5. In the Infor Grid, restart the MECSRV application to pick up the new Java class:
  6. In the Partner Admin Tool, create a partner agreement and add the message process:
  7. Reload the MEC server to pick up the new agreement:
  8. Run the partner agreement, for example I have a channel detection with a HTTPIn receive channel listening on port 8084, and I make an HTTP request to that port number to trigger the partner agreement.
  9. Check the message received (.rcv) and the message produced (in my case it was extension .something); for that, you will need one Archive process in your partner agreement, before and after your custom process:
  10. You can also open the files directly in the folder specified:
  11. And if you used the logger, you can check your logs in the Event tab:

Real-world example

In my case, I needed a custom message process for the following real-world scenario. My current customer does Procurement PunchOut with its partners using cXML, an old protocol from 1999. In that protocol, there is a step (PunchOutOrderMessage) that sends an XML document in a hidden field cxml-urlencoded of an HTML form. That results in a POST HTTP request (to MEC) with Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded, with the XML document that is URL-encoded as a value of parameter cxml-urlencoded in the request body. Unfortunately, MEC does not have a message process to extract a specific parameter value of a message, and URL-decode it. So I developed my custom message process as explained above, to take the request body, extract the desired parameter value, URL-decode it, and output the resulting XML. I may write a detailed post about it some day, maybe not.


That was a guide on how to create a custom message process in MEC, doing Java development, to take an input message in a partner agreement, do some custom processing on it, and produce an output message. This is an unofficial solution that I figured out by de-compiling and hacking MEC. There may be a simpler solution, I do not know.

That’s it! Thank you for supporting this blog, please like, subscribe, share around you, and come author the next blog post with us.

Procurement PunchOut with cXML

Hi colleagues. It has been a while since I posted anything. Today I will write a quick post as part of an interface I am currently developing to do procurement PunchOut using cXML, an old protocol from 1999, for my customer and its suppliers. This will eventually end up in their Infor M3 and M3 Enterprise Collaborator implementation.

I only needed to test the Message Authentication Code (MAC) so I wrote a quick prototype in Python.

The cXML User’s Guide describes the MAC algorithm using HMAC-SHA1-96:

Here is my implementation in Python:

# Normalize the values
data = [fromDomain.lower(),

# Concatenate the UTF-8-encoded byte representation of the strings, each followed by a null byte (0x00)
data = b''.join([(bytes(x, "utf-8") + b'\x00') for x in data])

# Calculate the Message Authentication Code (MAC)
digest ="utf-8"), data, hashlib.sha1).digest()

# Truncate to 96 bits (12 bytes)
truncated = digest[0:12]

# Base-64 encode, and convert bytearray to string
mac = str(base64.b64encode(truncated), "utf-8")

# Set the CredentialMac in the XML document
credentialMac = xml.find("Header/Sender/Credential").find("CredentialMac")
credentialMac.attrib["creationDate"] = creationDate
credentialMac.attrib["expirationDate"] = expirationDate
credentialMac.text = mac

Here is my resulting MAC, and it matches that of the cXML User’s Guide, good:

I posted the full source code in my GitHub repository at .

That’s it!

Thank you for continuing to support this blog.

HTTP channels in MEC (part 6)

Here is how to securely receive messages in MEC from partners over the Internet, in this sixth part of the guide on HTTP channels for Infor M3 Enterprise Collaborator (MEC). I will illustrate two goals: how to setup an HTTPIn or HTTPSyncIn channels in MEC over SSL/TLS, and how to expose them securely over the Internet. Previously, for the HTTPIn channel, refer to part 2; for the HTTPSyncIn channel refer to part 3; and for MEC over HTTP Secure (HTTPS) refer to part 5.


The desired goal is to allow partners to securely send messages to MEC using HTTP over SSL/TLS over the Internet. Also, the idea is to design the architecture in such a way that adding new partners is easy.

Here is the simplified diagram:


Unfortunately, MEC does not provide incoming channels for HTTPS, there are no HTTPSIn or HTTPSSyncIn channels. There is a WebServiceSyncIn channel that uses WS-Security for XML over SOAP, but it is not what I am interested in. Ideally, I would prefer to use the Infor Grid which already communicates via HTTPS, but unfortunately it does not have a native connection handler for MEC. Surprisingly, most projects I have seen use FTP + PGP, but that is insecure because the FTP username and password transit in clear text, so even though the files are encrypted a man-in-the-middle could intercept the credentials and create havoc like delete files or fill the disk with junk.

Alternatively, I could develop my own HTTPS server in Java on top of a custom MEC channel; the Java Secure Socket Extension (JSSE) is a good reference guide for how to implement SSL/TLS in Java. I have two options. I could use SSLServerSocket, but it uses blocking I/O contrary to MEC that uses non-blocking I/O for scalability and performance, consequently I would have to forgo scalability and performance. Or I could use SSLEngine to have non-blocking I/O for scalability and performance, but I would have to implement the entire TLS state machine which is overkill for my needs.


I will setup a public web server https∶// at my sample company.

For that, I will setup a reverse proxy with SSL termination upstream of HTTPIn or HTTPSyncIn channels. Thanks to Rickard Eklind for the tip on using Apache + mod_proxy; I will use nginx + ngx_http_proxy_module instead, as it uses non-blocking I/O similar to HTTPIn and HTTPSyncIn, and I think it is easier to setup; either combination will work. I will need to setup the proxy server on the DMZ, setup DNS records, and generate digital certificates.

If you cannot host your own server on the DMZ, or if you cannot create your own domain name in the DNS records, or if you cannot create your own digital certificate signed by a trusted certificate authority, you may be able to piggy back on an existing public web server in your company and simply add a new virtual directory, like https∶// that will forward requests to a content-based filtering router, decrypt, filter, re-encrypt and send the requests to your reverse proxy in the LAN.
Alternatively, I could have setup a dedicated secure line per partner – such as a VPN with a filter to restrict access to only a specific destination IP address and port number for MEC on the LAN – but for each new partner that would require a lot of paperwork, security clearance, and setup on both ends, which is possible, it is more sandboxed thus more desirable, but it may not be possible in some companies. And in some clouds it may be easier to setup web servers than VPNs.

Reverse proxy with SSL termination

A reverse proxy is an intermediate server that executes the client’s request to the destination server on behalf of the client without the client being aware of the presence of the proxy; this is unlike a forward proxy that we setup in a browser. In our case, MEC partners will connect to the reverse proxy as if it were MEC, and the proxy will make the requests to MEC.

SSL termination is where the SSL/TLS connection ends. In our case, the partner will initiate the connection to the reverse proxy using the proxy’s digital certificate (which is the proxy’s public key signed by a certificate authority), then the proxy will decrypt the SSL/TLS data using its private key, then the proxy will make the HTTP request in plain text to MEC, and the response will transit back in the opposite direction. The partner will need to previously have verified and added in its keystore the proxy’s certificate or one of the certificate authorities up the chain.

Here is the simplified nginx.conf:

http {
   server {
      listen 443 ssl;
      ssl_certificate cert;
      ssl_certificate_key key;
      location / {
         proxy_pass http://ecollaborator:8080/;

Here is the simplified diagram:

Note 1: This scenario assumes the servers are on the same network which is not true for the Internet. I will put the proxy in the DMZ. See the DMZ section below.
Note 2: This scenario assumes the data does not need to be encrypted on the second network segment which is not true either. I will install a second proxy on the same host as MEC. See the end-to-end encryption section below.


I need to accommodate multiple partners, for example partnerA, partnerB, and partnerC.

I will use virtual hosting to economically share resources on a single server instead of having a dedicated physical server or virtual private server per partner.


I will multiplex by URL path, for example /A, /B, and /C. I conjecture this is no less secure than doing it name-based or port-based. Also, I conjecture it is not subject to XSS attacks so long as we enforce client authentication (see the client authentication section below).

Here is the simplified nginx.conf:

location /A {
   # partnerA
location /B {
   # partnerB
location /C {
   # partnerC

Here is the simplified diagram:


Alternatively, I could multiplex by domain name, for example,, and But then for each new partner I would need a new network interface with a new public IP address – which is scarce to obtain – and update the A records of my DNS server. Or to share the same IP address I could use Server Name Indication (SNI) and update the CNAME records of my DNS server. In any case, I would have to issue a new digital certificate with an updated Subject Alternative Name (SAN) extension, or I could use one wildcard certificate but loose the possibility of Extended Validation Certificate, and anyway wildcard certificate is not considered secure per RFC6125#section-7.2. In the end, it is a maintenance nightmare, and relying on the respective teams could be a bottleneck in some companies.


As another alternative, I could multiplex by port number, for example,, and, indeed the same digital certificate will work for any port number, but then for each new partner I would have to update the firewall rules, it is possible, but it is more maintenance, and relying on the respective teams could be a bottleneck in some companies.


Then, I need to de-multiplex the requests to tell the partners apart in MEC. I will setup as many HTTPIn or HTTPSyncIn channels in MEC as there are partners, for example HTTPSyncIn_A on port 8081, HTTPSyncIn_B on port 8082, and HTTPSyncIn_C on port 8083, and in nginx for each partner I will setup a location block with a proxy_pass directive.

Here is the simplified nginx.conf:

location /A {
   proxy_pass http://ecollaborator:8081/;
location /B {
   proxy_pass http://ecollaborator:8082/;
location /C {
   proxy_pass http://ecollaborator:8083/;

Here is the simplified diagram:


Here are the receive channels in Partner Admin:



I need the client to authenticate the server, and vice versa, I need the server to authentication the client.

One of the properties of SSL/TLS is authentication, using digital certificates to affirm the identity of the entities, where server authentication is mandatory, and client authentication is optional. In my case, client authentication is mandatory.

Server authentication

The server (the reverse proxy) will present its digital certificate to the client (the MEC partner), and the client will do its certificate validation to authenticate the server.

Client authentication

On the other hand, the server (ultimately it is MEC) needs to authenticate the client (the MEC partner).

I could setup peer authentication for the proxy to verify the client’s digital certificate, but I have not tested this.

Instead, I will setup HTTP Basic authentication per path in the proxy. The username and password will be encrypted over SSL/TLS so they will remain confidential.  I will separate the locations and I will forward to each respective HTTPSyncIn channel in MEC.

Here is the simplified nginx.conf:

location /A {
   auth_basic "A";
   auth_basic_user_file A.htpasswd;
   proxy_pass http://ecollaborator:8081/;
location /B {
   auth_basic "B";
   auth_basic_user_file B.htpasswd;
   proxy_pass http://ecollaborator:8082/;
location /C {
   auth_basic "C";
   auth_basic_user_file C.htpasswd;
   proxy_pass http://ecollaborator:8083/;

In addition to that, we could setup rules in the firewall to only allow the source IP addresses of the partners to access the reverse proxy, it is great if combined with Basic authentication, but insufficient on its own.

To setup peer authentication, I would use ssl_verify_client. According to the nginx documentation, the context for the ssl_client_certificate directive is http and server only, not location. So I would have to append the various client certificates into one file; to be verified. And then I could use the $ssl_client_cert variable to tell partners apart; to be tested.
As another alternative, we could setup client authentication in the MEC agreement using a flat file detector to detect a username and password defined in the HTTP request payload. But that has many problems: 1) It would require hard-coding the username and password in clear text in MEC (passwords should be hashed and salted or at least encrypted), 2) if we need to change the password we would have to change and re-deploy the agreement, and 3) it would put the burden of password verification on MEC which is not designed to thwart brute force attacks.

Channel detection

Now, we have to carry over the authentication to MEC because even though nginx can pass the Basic authentication header to MEC, MEC does not use it, and if we do not authenticate partners and tell them apart they risk crossing each other. For that I will use a Channel detector in the MEC agreement of each partner.

Here are the channel detectors in Partner Admin:


A drawback emerges from this setup: the number of possible messages per channel is now limited to only one. If partner A wants to send two different messages 1 and 2, for example new customer order and new rental agreement, MEC is not able to process two messages in one agreement, and it cannot reuse the same receive channel in another agreement. To assist MEC, I would have to discriminate further by path in nginx, for instance /A/message1, and /A/message2, and have as many receive channels as possible messages. I can use nested location blocks (I have not tested this). Here is the simplified nginx.conf:

location /A {
   auth_basic "A";
   auth_basic_user_file A.htpasswd;
   location /message1 {
      proxy_pass http://ecollaborator:8001/;
   location /message2 {
      proxy_pass http://ecollaborator:8002/;

I am not trained in MEC Partner Admin so maybe there is a way around it.

…on the Internet

Once a web server is placed on the Internet it will get attacked, so consult with your network and security team to harden your servers. It should at least be in the DMZ between one or two firewalls:

Here is a simplified diagram:


Take also into account: high availability, redundancy, fail over, disaster recovery, edge caching, DNS round robin, IDS, content-based firewall, restrict physical access to the servers, restrict permissions to the files, software updates, operating system support, etc.

Note: The HTTP channels in MEC will be the single point of failure in spite of all this setup. The MEC Server runs on the Infor Grid, and the Infor Grid is meant to be distributed, fault tolerant, load balanced, scalable, and redundant. However, the HTTP channels of MEC are not Grid enabled (the HTTPIn and HTTPSyncIn channels manage their port and HTTP server themselves), so they are not distributed, fault tolerant, load balanced, scalable, and redundant, they are a single point of failure. You can learn more about Infor Grid application development on my other post.

End-to-end encryption

Now we need end-to-end encryption to protect the data on the second network segment from the reverse proxy on the DMZ to MEC on the LAN. For that, I will chain two reverse proxies with SSL termination. I will simply install the second proxy on the same host as MEC. And I will issue a second pair of digital certificate and private key for the second proxy that the two proxies will use to encrypt/decrypt. That simplifies the rules of the internal firewall, and I can setup peer authentication between the proxies.

Here is the simplified diagram with the two proxies X and Y:


How to add new partners

To add a new partner D:

  1. Setup a new Receive channel in Partner Admin with a new HTTPIn or HTTPSyncIn channel for example on port 8084
  2. Setup a new agreement with channel detector
  3. Test by making an HTTP request to MEC on port 8084
  4. Setup the inner proxy:
    1. Setup a new location block in nginx.conf for path /D with proxy_pass directive to port 8084 and basic authentication
    2. Setup a new htpasswd file
    3. Restart nginx
    4. Test by making an HTTPS request to the proxy
  5. Setup the outer proxy to pass requests to the inner proxy and test it (I do not have guidelines here as my actual setup for the outer proxy uses a content-based router, not nginx)
  6. Test by making an HTTPS request from the partner to https∶//

How to setup multiple environments

To setup multiple environments, such as DEV, TST, PRD, use nested location blocks in nginx.conf, for example /DEV, /TST, /PRD (I have not tested this).

Here is the simplified nginx.conf:

location /DEV {
   location /A {
      # Development partnerA
   location /B {
      # Development partnerB
location /TST {
   location /A {
      # Test partnerA
   location /B {
      # Test partnerB


This is the first time I setup this architecture, I have not tested all the design variations, and I have not validated that my design is a good design nor that it is secure. I am currently using a similar architecture at a major customer of mine for their production environment where they have multiple data centers, high availability, redundancy, fail over, and disaster recovery. One of their technical people reviewed the solution, they approved it, and the only concerns were that this solution might be over engineered (plausible) and that the MEC channels are the single point of failure anyway (true). I conjecture the solution is good enough and secure enough for our needs. Of course I could be completely wrong and not see a major flaw. Nothing is fully secure anyway. Please let me know what you think in the comments below.

Upcoming version of MEC

Johan Löfgren, the component owner for MEC at Infor Product Development, said they are working on a native HTTPSIn channel for an upcoming version of MEC; it is not GA and the release may or may not occur. If and when that happens, you would not need to chain two proxies anymore, you would just keep one proxy in the DMZ and use proxy_pass to send the requests directly to the HTTPSIn channels in MEC.

UPDATE 2015-04-12: What is being released is SFTP, no plans for HTTPS at the moment.


This was one solution to setup incoming HTTP channels in MEC to securely receive messages over SSL/TLS over the Internet. MEC does not have an HTTPSIn or HTTPSSyncIn channel, and I did not want to implement my own HTTP server over SSL/TLS in Java. Instead, I chose to setup a reverse proxy with SSL termination in a DMZ, with digital certificate and private keys, with HTTP basic authentication, with a second proxy in the MEC host for end-to-end encryption. This solution has many properties: it uses standard HTTP and SSL/TLS, and it is easy to add new partners. Also, we simplified the architecture upstream such that we do not have to rely on other teams if we need to add a new partner, which can be a maintenance nightmare and bottleneck in some companies; we can simply add new partners downstream in our proxy and Partner Admin. I conjecture this solution is secure for our needs. But remember it has not been fully reviewed, and the MEC channels are the single point of failure.

Please let me know what you think in the comments below.

Related articles