Were you referring to Hugo's post, or to the table scheme i posted?
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Jochem van Dieten
  To: CF-Talk
  Sent: Monday, October 13, 2003 5:04 AM
  Subject: Re: ACL database design

  brob said:
  > From: Jochem van Dieten
  >> Hugo Ahlenius wrote:
  >>
  >>> I actually had in mind an unlimited parent/child relationships
  >>> in the groups. So that the super-parent would be the "Admin"
  >>> group, that all other groups are derived from, like "superusers"
  >>> inherit the rights from the admin group, but with rights X,Y & Z
  >>> revoked. And the "regular users group" is a child of the
  >>> "superusers" group, etc.
  >>
  >> You do realize this is a "fail open" model? I.e., if somehing goes
  >> wrong the user defaults to being Admin, instead of being nobody.
  >> Most security systems are designed as "fail close" systems.
  >
  > Can you explain please?

  In this model all users are Admin by default. Suppose you are adding a
  new user. At that moment he is Admin. Only when you place him in
  different groups he gets certain rights revoked. But what if adding
  him to a different group fails? Could be because of a program error,
  or even because the person that is setting up the new account gets a
  phone call when he is working on it and forgets to finish it.

  Security systems should be designed in such a way that by default they
  deny access, not grant it. (Fail open and fail close are actually
  terms from engineering, if you are designing a refinery or nuclear
  installation you have to specify with every single valve if it should
  open or close in case of a power or controller failure.)

  Jochem


[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]

Reply via email to