= Configuration Migrations

The following steps relate to changes around how to configure `HttpSecurity`, `WebSecurity`, and `AuthenticationManager`.

[[add-configuration-annotation]]
== Add `@Configuration` annotation

In 6.0, `@Configuration` is removed from `@EnableWebSecurity`, `@EnableMethodSecurity`,  `@EnableGlobalMethodSecurity`, and `@EnableGlobalAuthentication`.

To prepare for this, wherever you are using one of these annotations, you may need to add `@Configuration`.
For example, `@EnableMethodSecurity` changes from:

[tabs]
======
Java::
+
[source,java,role="primary"]
----
@EnableMethodSecurity
public class MyConfiguration {
	// ...
}
----
======

[tabs]
======
Kotlin::
+
[source,java,role="primary"]
----
@EnableMethodSecurity
open class MyConfiguration {
	// ...
}
----
======

to:

[tabs]
======
Java::
+
[source,java,role="primary"]
----
@Configuration
@EnableMethodSecurity
public class MyConfiguration {
	// ...
}
----
======

[tabs]
======
Kotlin::
+
[source,java,role="primary"]
----
@Configuration
@EnableMethodSecurity
open class MyConfiguration {
	// ...
}
----
======

[[use-new-requestmatchers]]
== Use the new `requestMatchers` methods

In Spring Security 5.8, the {security-api-url}org/springframework/security/config/annotation/web/AbstractRequestMatcherRegistry.html#antMatchers(java.lang.String...)[`antMatchers`], {security-api-url}org/springframework/security/config/annotation/web/AbstractRequestMatcherRegistry.html#mvcMatchers(java.lang.String...)[`mvcMatchers`], and {security-api-url}org/springframework/security/config/annotation/web/AbstractRequestMatcherRegistry.html#regexMatchers(java.lang.String...)[`regexMatchers`] methods were deprecated in favor of new xref:servlet/authorization/authorize-http-requests.adoc#_request_matchers[`requestMatchers` methods].

The new `requestMatchers` methods were added xref:servlet/authorization/authorize-http-requests.adoc[to `authorizeHttpRequests`], `authorizeRequests`, CSRF configuration, `WebSecurityCustomizer` and any other places that had the specialized `RequestMatcher` methods.
The deprecated methods are removed in Spring Security 6.

These new methods have more secure defaults since they choose the most appropriate `RequestMatcher` implementation for your application.
In summary, the new methods choose the `MvcRequestMatcher` implementation if your application has Spring MVC in the classpath, falling back to the `AntPathRequestMatcher` implementation if Spring MVC is not present (aligning the behavior with the Kotlin equivalent methods).

To start using the new methods, you can replace the deprecated methods with the new ones. For example, the following application configuration:

[tabs]
======
Java::
+
[source,java,role="primary"]
----
@Configuration
@EnableWebSecurity
public class SecurityConfig {

    @Bean
    public SecurityFilterChain securityFilterChain(HttpSecurity http) throws Exception {
        http
            .authorizeHttpRequests((authz) -> authz
                .antMatchers("/api/admin/**").hasRole("ADMIN")
                .antMatchers("/api/user/**").hasRole("USER")
                .anyRequest().authenticated()
            );
        return http.build();
    }

}
----
======

can be changed to:

[tabs]
======
Java::
+
[source,java,role="primary"]
----
@Configuration
@EnableWebSecurity
public class SecurityConfig {

    @Bean
    public SecurityFilterChain securityFilterChain(HttpSecurity http) throws Exception {
        http
            .authorizeHttpRequests((authz) -> authz
                .requestMatchers("/api/admin/**").hasRole("ADMIN")
                .requestMatchers("/api/user/**").hasRole("USER")
                .anyRequest().authenticated()
            );
        return http.build();
    }

}
----
======

If you have Spring MVC in the classpath and are using the `mvcMatchers` methods, you can replace it with the new methods and Spring Security will choose the `MvcRequestMatcher` implementation for you.
The following configuration:

[tabs]
======
Java::
+
[source,java,role="primary"]
----
@Configuration
@EnableWebSecurity
@EnableWebMvc
public class SecurityConfig {

    @Bean
    SecurityFilterChain securityFilterChain(HttpSecurity http) throws Exception {
        http
            .authorizeHttpRequests((authz) -> authz
                .mvcMatchers("/admin/**").hasRole("ADMIN")
                .anyRequest().authenticated()
            );
        return http.build();
    }

}
----
======

is equivalent to:

[tabs]
======
Java::
+
[source,java,role="primary"]
----
@Configuration
@EnableWebSecurity
@EnableWebMvc
public class SecurityConfig {

    @Bean
    SecurityFilterChain securityFilterChain(HttpSecurity http) throws Exception {
        http
            .authorizeHttpRequests((authz) -> authz
                .requestMatchers("/admin/**").hasRole("ADMIN")
                .anyRequest().authenticated()
            );
        return http.build();
    }

}
----
======

If you are customizing the `servletPath` property of the `MvcRequestMatcher`, you can now use the `MvcRequestMatcher.Builder` to create `MvcRequestMatcher` instances that share the same servlet path:

[tabs]
======
Java::
+
[source,java,role="primary"]
----
@Configuration
@EnableWebSecurity
@EnableWebMvc
public class SecurityConfig {

    @Bean
    SecurityFilterChain securityFilterChain(HttpSecurity http) throws Exception {
        http
            .authorizeHttpRequests((authz) -> authz
                .mvcMatchers("/admin").servletPath("/path").hasRole("ADMIN")
                .mvcMatchers("/user").servletPath("/path").hasRole("USER")
                .anyRequest().authenticated()
            );
        return http.build();
    }

}
----
======

The code above can be rewritten using the `MvcRequestMatcher.Builder` and the `requestMatchers` method:

[tabs]
======
Java::
+
[source,java,role="primary"]
----
@Configuration
@EnableWebSecurity
@EnableWebMvc
public class SecurityConfig {

    @Bean
    SecurityFilterChain securityFilterChain(HttpSecurity http, HandlerMappingIntrospector introspector) throws Exception {
        MvcRequestMatcher.Builder mvcMatcherBuilder = new MvcRequestMatcher.Builder(introspector).servletPath("/path");
        http
            .authorizeHttpRequests((authz) -> authz
                .requestMatchers(mvcMatcherBuilder.pattern("/admin")).hasRole("ADMIN")
                .requestMatchers(mvcMatcherBuilder.pattern("/user")).hasRole("USER")
                .anyRequest().authenticated()
            );
        return http.build();
    }

}
----
======

If you are having problem with the new `requestMatchers` methods, you can always switch back to the `RequestMatcher` implementation that you were using.
For example, if you still want to use `AntPathRequestMatcher` and `RegexRequestMatcher` implementations, you can use the `requestMatchers` method that accepts a `RequestMatcher` instance:

[tabs]
======
Java::
+
[source,java,role="primary"]
----
import static org.springframework.security.web.util.matcher.AntPathRequestMatcher.antMatcher;
import static org.springframework.security.web.util.matcher.RegexRequestMatcher.regexMatcher;

@Configuration
@EnableWebSecurity
public class SecurityConfig {

    @Bean
    SecurityFilterChain securityFilterChain(HttpSecurity http) throws Exception {
        http
            .authorizeHttpRequests((authz) -> authz
                .requestMatchers(antMatcher("/user/**")).hasRole("USER")
                .requestMatchers(antMatcher(HttpMethod.POST, "/user/**")).hasRole("ADMIN")
                .requestMatchers(regexMatcher(".*\\?x=y")).hasRole("SPECIAL") // matches /any/path?x=y
                .anyRequest().authenticated()
            );
        return http.build();
    }

}
----
======

Note that the above sample uses static factory methods from {security-api-url}org/springframework/security/web/util/matcher/AntPathRequestMatcher.html[`AntPathRequestMatcher`] and {security-api-url}org/springframework/security/web/util/matcher/RegexRequestMatcher.html[`RegexRequestMatcher`] to improve readability.

If you are using the `WebSecurityCustomizer` interface, you can replace the deprecated `antMatchers` methods:

[tabs]
======
Java::
+
[source,java,role="primary"]
----
@Bean
public WebSecurityCustomizer webSecurityCustomizer() {
	return (web) -> web.ignoring().antMatchers("/ignore1", "/ignore2");
}
----
======

with their `requestMatchers` counterparts:

[tabs]
======
Java::
+
[source,java,role="primary"]
----
@Bean
public WebSecurityCustomizer webSecurityCustomizer() {
	return (web) -> web.ignoring().requestMatchers("/ignore1", "/ignore2");
}
----
======

The same way, if you are customizing the CSRF configuration to ignore some paths, you can replace the deprecated methods with the `requestMatchers` methods:

[tabs]
======
Java::
+
[source,java,role="primary"]
----
@Bean
public SecurityFilterChain filterChain(HttpSecurity http) throws Exception {
    http
        .csrf((csrf) -> csrf
            .ignoringAntMatchers("/no-csrf")
        );
    return http.build();
}
----
======

can be changed to:

[tabs]
======
Java::
+
[source,java,role="primary"]
----
@Bean
public SecurityFilterChain filterChain(HttpSecurity http) throws Exception {
    http
        .csrf((csrf) -> csrf
            .ignoringRequestMatchers("/no-csrf")
        );
    return http.build();
}
----
======

[[use-new-security-matchers]]
== Use the new `securityMatchers` methods

In Spring Security 5.8, the `antMatchers`, `mvcMatchers` and `requestMatchers` methods from `HttpSecurity` were deprecated in favor of new `securityMatchers` methods.

Note that these methods are not the same from `authorizeHttpRequests` methods <<use-new-requestmatchers,which were deprecated>> in favor of the `requestMatchers` methods.
However, the `securityMatchers` methods are similar to the `requestMatchers` methods in the sense that they will choose the most appropriate `RequestMatcher` implementation for your application.
In summary, the new methods choose the `MvcRequestMatcher` implementation if your application has Spring MVC in the classpath, falling back to the `AntPathRequestMatcher` implementation if Spring MVC is not present (aligning the behavior with the Kotlin equivalent methods).
Another reason for adding the `securityMatchers` methods is to avoid confusion with the `requestMatchers` methods from `authorizeHttpRequests`.

The following configuration:

[tabs]
======
Java::
+
[source,java,role="primary"]
----
@Bean
public SecurityFilterChain filterChain(HttpSecurity http) throws Exception {
    http
        .antMatcher("/api/**", "/app/**")
        .authorizeHttpRequests((authz) -> authz
            .requestMatchers("/api/admin/**").hasRole("ADMIN")
            .anyRequest().authenticated()
        );
    return http.build();
}
----
======

can be rewritten using the `securityMatchers` methods:

[tabs]
======
Java::
+
[source,java,role="primary"]
----
@Bean
public SecurityFilterChain filterChain(HttpSecurity http) throws Exception {
    http
        .securityMatcher("/api/**", "/app/**")
        .authorizeHttpRequests((authz) -> authz
            .requestMatchers("/api/admin/**").hasRole("ADMIN")
            .anyRequest().authenticated()
        );
    return http.build();
}
----
======

If you are using a custom `RequestMatcher` in your `HttpSecurity` configuration:

[tabs]
======
Java::
+
[source,java,role="primary"]
----
@Bean
public SecurityFilterChain filterChain(HttpSecurity http) throws Exception {
    http
        .requestMatcher(new MyCustomRequestMatcher())
        .authorizeHttpRequests((authz) -> authz
            .requestMatchers("/api/admin/**").hasRole("ADMIN")
            .anyRequest().authenticated()
        );
    return http.build();
}

public class MyCustomRequestMatcher implements RequestMatcher {
	// ...
}
----
======

you can do the same using `securityMatcher`:

[tabs]
======
Java::
+
[source,java,role="primary"]
----
@Bean
public SecurityFilterChain filterChain(HttpSecurity http) throws Exception {
    http
        .securityMatcher(new MyCustomRequestMatcher())
        .authorizeHttpRequests((authz) -> authz
            .requestMatchers("/api/admin/**").hasRole("ADMIN")
            .anyRequest().authenticated()
        );
    return http.build();
}

public class MyCustomRequestMatcher implements RequestMatcher {
	// ...
}
----
======

If you are combining multiple `RequestMatcher` implementations in your `HttpSecurity` configuration:

[tabs]
======
Java::
+
[source,java,role="primary"]
----
@Bean
public SecurityFilterChain filterChain(HttpSecurity http) throws Exception {
    http
        .requestMatchers((matchers) -> matchers
            .antMatchers("/api/**", "/app/**")
            .mvcMatchers("/admin/**")
            .requestMatchers(new MyCustomRequestMatcher())
        )
        .authorizeHttpRequests((authz) -> authz
            .requestMatchers("/admin/**").hasRole("ADMIN")
            .anyRequest().authenticated()
        );
    return http.build();
}
----
======

you can change it by using `securityMatchers`:

[tabs]
======
Java::
+
[source,java,role="primary"]
----
@Bean
public SecurityFilterChain filterChain(HttpSecurity http) throws Exception {
    http
        .securityMatchers((matchers) -> matchers
            .requestMatchers("/api/**", "/app/**", "/admin/**")
            .requestMatchers(new MyCustomRequestMatcher())
        )
        .authorizeHttpRequests((authz) -> authz
            .requestMatchers("/admin/**").hasRole("ADMIN")
            .anyRequest().authenticated()
        );
    return http.build();
}
----
======

If you are having problems with the `securityMatchers` methods choosing the `RequestMatcher` implementation for you, you can always choose the `RequestMatcher` implementation yourself:

[tabs]
======
Java::
+
[source,java,role="primary"]
----
import static org.springframework.security.web.util.matcher.AntPathRequestMatcher.antMatcher;

@Bean
public SecurityFilterChain filterChain(HttpSecurity http) throws Exception {
    http
        .securityMatchers((matchers) -> matchers
            .requestMatchers(antMatcher("/api/**"), antMatcher("/app/**"))
        )
        .authorizeHttpRequests((authz) -> authz
            .requestMatchers(antMatcher("/api/admin/**")).hasRole("ADMIN")
            .anyRequest().authenticated()
        );
    return http.build();
}
----
======

== Stop Using `WebSecurityConfigurerAdapter`

=== Publish a `SecurityFilterChain` Bean

Spring Security 5.4 introduced the capability to publish a `SecurityFilterChain` bean instead of extending `WebSecurityConfigurerAdapter`.
In 6.0, `WebSecurityConfigurerAdapter` is removed.
To prepare for this change, you can replace constructs like:

[tabs]
======
Java::
+
[source,java,role="primary"]
----
@Configuration
public class SecurityConfiguration extends WebSecurityConfigurerAdapter {

    @Override
    protected void configure(HttpSecurity http) throws Exception {
        http
            .authorizeHttpRequests((authorize) -> authorize
                .anyRequest().authenticated()
            )
            .httpBasic(withDefaults());
    }

}
----

Kotlin::
+
[source,kotlin,role="secondary"]
----
@Configuration
open class SecurityConfiguration: WebSecurityConfigurerAdapter() {

    @Override
    override fun configure(val http: HttpSecurity) {
        http {
            authorizeHttpRequests {
                authorize(anyRequest, authenticated)
            }

            httpBasic {}
        }
    }

}
----
======

with:

[tabs]
======
Java::
+
[source,java,role="primary"]
----
@Configuration
public class SecurityConfiguration {

    @Bean
    public SecurityFilterChain filterChain(HttpSecurity http) throws Exception {
        http
            .authorizeHttpRequests((authorize) -> authorize
                .anyRequest().authenticated()
            )
            .httpBasic(withDefaults());
        return http.build();
    }

}
----

Kotlin::
+
[source,kotlin,role="secondary"]
----
@Configuration
open class SecurityConfiguration {

    @Bean
    fun filterChain(http: HttpSecurity): SecurityFilterChain {
        http {
            authorizeHttpRequests {
                authorize(anyRequest, authenticated)
            }
            httpBasic {}
        }
        return http.build()
    }

}
----
======

=== Publish a `WebSecurityCustomizer` Bean

Spring Security 5.4 https://github.com/spring-projects/spring-security/issues/8978[introduced `WebSecurityCustomizer`] to replace `configure(WebSecurity web)` in `WebSecurityConfigurerAdapter`.
To prepare for its removal, you can replace code like the following:

[tabs]
======
Java::
+
[source,java,role="primary"]
----
@Configuration
public class SecurityConfiguration extends WebSecurityConfigurerAdapter {

    @Override
    public void configure(WebSecurity web) {
        web.ignoring().antMatchers("/ignore1", "/ignore2");
    }

}
----

Kotlin::
+
[source,kotlin,role="secondary"]
----
@Configuration
open class SecurityConfiguration: WebSecurityConfigurerAdapter() {

    override fun configure(val web: WebSecurity) {
        web.ignoring().antMatchers("/ignore1", "/ignore2")
    }

}
----
======

with:

[tabs]
======
Java::
+
[source,java,role="primary"]
----
@Configuration
public class SecurityConfiguration {

    @Bean
    public WebSecurityCustomizer webSecurityCustomizer() {
        return (web) -> web.ignoring().antMatchers("/ignore1", "/ignore2");
    }

}
----

Kotlin::
+
[source,kotlin,role="secondary"]
----
@Configuration
open class SecurityConfiguration {

    @Bean
    fun webSecurityCustomizer(): WebSecurityCustomizer {
        return (web) -> web.ignoring().antMatchers("/ignore1", "/ignore2")
    }

}
----
======

=== Publish an `AuthenticationManager` Bean

As part of `WebSecurityConfigurerAdapter` removal, `configure(AuthenticationManagerBuilder)` is also removed.
Preparing for its removal will differ based on your reason for using it.

==== LDAP Authentication

If you are using `auth.ldapAuthentication()` for xref:servlet/authentication/passwords/ldap.adoc[LDAP authentication support], you can replace:

[tabs]
======
Java::
+
[source,java,role="primary"]
----
@Configuration
public class SecurityConfiguration extends WebSecurityConfigurerAdapter {

    @Override
    protected void configure(AuthenticationManagerBuilder auth) throws Exception {
        auth
            .ldapAuthentication()
                .userDetailsContextMapper(new PersonContextMapper())
                .userDnPatterns("uid={0},ou=people")
                .contextSource()
                .port(0);
    }

}
----

Kotlin::
+
[source,kotlin,role="secondary"]
----
@Configuration
open class SecurityConfiguration: WebSecurityConfigurerAdapter() {

    override fun configure(auth: AuthenticationManagerBuilder) {
        auth
            .ldapAuthentication()
                .userDetailsContextMapper(PersonContextMapper())
                .userDnPatterns("uid={0},ou=people")
                .contextSource()
                .port(0)
    }

}
----
======

with:

[tabs]
======
Java::
+
[source,java,role="primary"]
----
@Configuration
public class SecurityConfiguration {
    @Bean
    public EmbeddedLdapServerContextSourceFactoryBean contextSourceFactoryBean() {
        EmbeddedLdapServerContextSourceFactoryBean contextSourceFactoryBean =
            EmbeddedLdapServerContextSourceFactoryBean.fromEmbeddedLdapServer();
        contextSourceFactoryBean.setPort(0);
        return contextSourceFactoryBean;
    }

    @Bean
    AuthenticationManager ldapAuthenticationManager(BaseLdapPathContextSource contextSource) {
        LdapBindAuthenticationManagerFactory factory =
            new LdapBindAuthenticationManagerFactory(contextSource);
        factory.setUserDnPatterns("uid={0},ou=people");
        factory.setUserDetailsContextMapper(new PersonContextMapper());
        return factory.createAuthenticationManager();
    }
}
----

Kotlin::
+
[source,kotlin,role="secondary"]
----
@Configuration
open class SecurityConfiguration {
    @Bean
    fun contextSourceFactoryBean(): EmbeddedLdapServerContextSourceFactoryBean {
        val contextSourceFactoryBean: EmbeddedLdapServerContextSourceFactoryBean =
            EmbeddedLdapServerContextSourceFactoryBean.fromEmbeddedLdapServer()
        contextSourceFactoryBean.setPort(0)
        return contextSourceFactoryBean
    }

    @Bean
    fun ldapAuthenticationManager(val contextSource: BaseLdapPathContextSource): AuthenticationManager {
        val factory = LdapBindAuthenticationManagerFactory(contextSource)
        factory.setUserDnPatterns("uid={0},ou=people")
        factory.setUserDetailsContextMapper(PersonContextMapper())
        return factory.createAuthenticationManager()
    }
}
----
======

==== JDBC Authentication

If you are using `auth.jdbcAuthentication()` for xref:servlet/authentication/passwords/jdbc.adoc[JDBC Authentication support], you can replace:

[tabs]
======
Java::
+
[source,java,role="primary"]
----
@Configuration
public class SecurityConfiguration extends WebSecurityConfigurerAdapter {
    @Bean
    public DataSource dataSource() {
        return new EmbeddedDatabaseBuilder()
            .setType(EmbeddedDatabaseType.H2)
            .build();
    }

    @Override
    protected void configure(AuthenticationManagerBuilder auth) throws Exception {
        UserDetails user = User.withDefaultPasswordEncoder()
            .username("user")
            .password("password")
            .roles("USER")
            .build();
        auth.jdbcAuthentication()
            .withDefaultSchema()
                .dataSource(this.dataSource)
                .withUser(user);
    }
}
----

Kotlin::
+
[source,kotlin,role="secondary"]
----
@Configuration
open class SecurityConfiguration: WebSecurityConfigurerAdapter() {
    @Bean
    fun dataSource(): DataSource {
        return EmbeddedDatabaseBuilder()
            .setType(EmbeddedDatabaseType.H2)
            .build()
    }

    override fun configure(val auth: AuthenticationManagerBuilder) {
        UserDetails user = User.withDefaultPasswordEncoder()
            .username("user")
            .password("password")
            .roles("USER")
            .build()
        auth.jdbcAuthentication()
            .withDefaultSchema()
                .dataSource(this.dataSource)
                .withUser(user)
    }
}
----
======

with:

[tabs]
======
Java::
+
[source,java,role="primary"]
----
@Configuration
public class SecurityConfiguration {
    @Bean
    public DataSource dataSource() {
        return new EmbeddedDatabaseBuilder()
            .setType(EmbeddedDatabaseType.H2)
            .addScript(JdbcDaoImpl.DEFAULT_USER_SCHEMA_DDL_LOCATION)
            .build();
    }

    @Bean
    public UserDetailsManager users(DataSource dataSource) {
        UserDetails user = User.withDefaultPasswordEncoder()
            .username("user")
            .password("password")
            .roles("USER")
            .build();
        JdbcUserDetailsManager users = new JdbcUserDetailsManager(dataSource);
        users.createUser(user);
        return users;
    }
}
----

Kotlin::
+
[source,kotlin,role="secondary"]
----
@Configuration
open class SecurityConfiguration {
    @Bean
    fun dataSource(): DataSource {
        return EmbeddedDatabaseBuilder()
            .setType(EmbeddedDatabaseType.H2)
            .addScript(JdbcDaoImpl.DEFAULT_USER_SCHEMA_DDL_LOCATION)
            .build()
    }

    @Bean
    fun users(val dataSource: DataSource): UserDetailsManager {
        val user = User.withDefaultPasswordEncoder()
            .username("user")
            .password("password")
            .roles("USER")
            .build()
        val users = JdbcUserDetailsManager(dataSource)
        users.createUser(user)
        return users
    }
}
----
======

==== In-Memory Authentication

If you are using `auth.inMemoryAuthentication()` for xref:servlet/authentication/passwords/in-memory.adoc[In-Memory Authentication support], you can replace:

[tabs]
======
Java::
+
[source,java,role="primary"]
----
@Configuration
public class SecurityConfiguration extends WebSecurityConfigurerAdapter {
    @Override
    protected void configure(AuthenticationManagerBuilder auth) throws Exception {
        UserDetails user = User.withDefaultPasswordEncoder()
            .username("user")
            .password("password")
            .roles("USER")
            .build();
        auth.inMemoryAuthentication()
            .withUser(user);
    }
}
----

Kotlin::
+
[source,kotlin,role="secondary"]
----
@Configuration
open class SecurityConfiguration: WebSecurityConfigurerAdapter() {
    override fun configure(val auth: AuthenticationManagerBuilder) {
        val user = User.withDefaultPasswordEncoder()
            .username("user")
            .password("password")
            .roles("USER")
            .build()
        auth.inMemoryAuthentication()
            .withUser(user)
    }
}
----
======

with:

[tabs]
======
Java::
+
[source,java,role="primary"]
----
@Configuration
public class SecurityConfiguration {
    @Bean
    public InMemoryUserDetailsManager userDetailsService() {
        UserDetails user = User.withDefaultPasswordEncoder()
            .username("user")
            .password("password")
            .roles("USER")
            .build();
        return new InMemoryUserDetailsManager(user);
    }
}
----

Kotlin::
+
[source,kotlin,role="secondary"]
----
@Configuration
open class SecurityConfiguration {
    @Bean
    fun userDetailsService(): InMemoryUserDetailsManager {
        UserDetails user = User.withDefaultPasswordEncoder()
            .username("user")
            .password("password")
            .roles("USER")
            .build()
        return InMemoryUserDetailsManager(user)
    }
}
----
======

== Add `@Configuration` to `@Enable*` annotations

In 6.0, all Spring Security's `@Enable*` annotations had their `@Configuration` removed.
While convenient, it was not consistent with the rest of the Spring projects and most notably Spring Framework's `@Enable*` annotations.
Additionally, the introduction of support for `@Configuration(proxyBeanMethods=false)` in Spring Framework provides another reason to remove `@Configuration` meta-annotation from Spring Security's `@Enable*` annotations and allow users to opt into their preferred configuration mode.

The following annotations had their `@Configuration` removed:

- `@EnableGlobalAuthentication`
- `@EnableGlobalMethodSecurity`
- `@EnableMethodSecurity`
- `@EnableReactiveMethodSecurity`
- `@EnableWebSecurity`
- `@EnableWebFluxSecurity`

For example, if you are using `@EnableWebSecurity`, you will need to change:

[tabs]
======
Java::
+
[source,java,role="primary"]
----
@EnableWebSecurity
public class SecurityConfig {
	// ...
}
----
======

to:

[tabs]
======
Java::
+
[source,java,role="primary"]
----
@Configuration
@EnableWebSecurity
public class SecurityConfig {
	// ...
}
----
======

And the same applies to every other annotation listed above.

=== Other Scenarios

If you are using `AuthenticationManagerBuilder` for something more sophisticated, you can xref:servlet/authentication/architecture.adoc#servlet-authentication-authenticationmanager[publish your own `AuthenticationManager` `@Bean`] or wire an `AuthenticationManager` instance into the `HttpSecurity` DSL with {security-api-url}org/springframework/security/config/annotation/web/builders/HttpSecurity.html#authenticationManager(org.springframework.security.authentication.AuthenticationManager)[`HttpSecurity#authenticationManager`].
