I have another requirement : being able to dissalow acces to some pages for some users if a number of hits in a pre-defined period of time is exceeded. I have an idea of how to do that but do you thing it could be interesting to be commited ? Maybe in a more generic way ?

The purpose is security : this would prevent any kind of robot to pull out 
confidential data from the system.

Thanks

Jacques

From: "Jacques Le Roux" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
So refering to defintions in http://docs.ofbiz.org/display/OFBTECH/OFBiz+security this would be between the component menu level and
the screen level (which use "<if-has-permission" and "<if-service-permission" 
tags), that's it ?

It would be great to be able to hide menus as Bruno suggested (having a  
parameter in menu-item like David sugested for screens
def). It could be then named the menu level permission (we should then rename the component menu level to component level or even application level)

In a 1st and generic approach we could use 2 user categories : experts and 
novices. By default the expert mode would be used (all
shown OOTB) but users could change this in their preferences to novice mode. So 
this would need to define what novice could and
should not see in  all OFBiz (and should be updated later, being visible by 
default).

Later contributors could defines specific categories and they could be added to users's preferences choice. Could not roles be used
for that or is it really orthogonal ?  (customer service can't see some 
accounting screens, but are able to view some other etc.).

My 2 cts

Jacques

From: "Bruno Busco" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
David,
I like this idea.

So we should add a screen property to specify a permission.
The same permission should be checked to render the menu item that takes to
that screen (sub-screen).
Is this what you mean?

This could be done even without the "getAllPermissions" service proposed, am
I right?

-Bruno



2008/12/3 David E Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


One option for this (or at least part of it), and one that I think has been
discussed before, would be to introduce a convention for naming permissions
(or more to the point, "ID-ing" permissions) based on screen names and
locations. A few aspects of this:

1. We could configure specific screens to always require the
screen-specific permission, or to require either a general permission
(probably specified in the screen def) or the screen-specific permission

2. this would be a view-only permission for rendering the screen

3. doing it for each screen defined would allow for permissions on
sub-screens and such as well

-David



On Nov 30, 2008, at 12:32 AM, Bruno Busco wrote:

 I need to simplify the UI has I described.
To do this I think the Map should contain ALL user permissions, not
restricted to a single application.
Could we think to specific permissions to hide the TabBar options?

I understand that OFBiz UI is designed to have ALL there because at least
everybody sees that a feature is available but this creates a problem when
deplying to end user.
I understand also that the perfect UI is the one that reproduces the very
specific users workflow and so it must be written ad hoc.
But having an 80% fitting UI with only permissions setting (user
profiling)
could be a good result.

This IMO is another key factor for spreading OFBiz and having more people
using it.

I would like to hear other idea about this and, possibly, some user
profiling pattern ideas.
For sure the Portlet system will help in this direction but could we think
to a UI profiling through permission too?

-Bruno

2008/11/30 Adrian Crum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

 Bruno,

I never got around to implementing that idea. I would still like to work
on
it though.

-Adrian


--- On Sat, 11/29/08, Bruno Busco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

 From: Bruno Busco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Discussion: Permissions Checking Enhancement
To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
Date: Saturday, November 29, 2008, 10:30 AM
Hi Adrian,
I am thinking to something similar to what you proposed in
this thread.
What I would like to do is to simplify the UI to users who
should not
perform some operations.

For instance, in the catalog application, when looking to
the EditProduct
screen, I would like that the following tabmenus:
Geos, IDs, Keywords, Associations, Manufacturing, Costs,
Attributes,
Agreements, Accounts, Maintenance, Meters, Workefforts

should not be visible to standard users while they should
be visible to
admin.

I am thinking to implement several permissions (may be some
are already
there) and to check for them in the menu items.
What do you think?
Did you implement something about it?

Thank you,
-Bruno

2008/6/6 Adrian Crum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

 Correct.


Bruno Busco wrote:

 Thank you,
it make sense; so a CREATE permission check will

be sufficient for the

CREATE button rendering.
-Bruno

2008/6/6 Adrian Crum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

The pattern used so far is that the ADMIN

permission is checked first,

then
the other permissions. So if a user has the

ADMIN permission, they don't

need the additional permissions.

I'll probably have all of the permissions

Map elements set to true if the

user has the ADMIN permission.

-Adrian


Bruno Busco wrote:

Adrian,

may be a newbie question but...
...in the example you give what will

happen if a user has the ADMIN

permission but not the CREATE one?
Will the Create New button be rendered?

In other words who is responsible for the

permission hierarchy ?

In order to display the CREATE button,

should a user be given with the

CREATE permission explicitly or the ADMIN

is sufficient?


Thank you
-Bruno



2008/6/6 Adrian Crum

<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:


I'll work on it this weekend.

 -Adrian


Ashish Vijaywargiya wrote:

+1

 Adrian I liked your idea.

On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 12:46 AM,

Sumit Pandit <

[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

+1

 --

  Sumit Pandit


On Jun 5, 2008, at 3:04 AM,

Jacques Le Roux wrote:


Yes this sounds good to me

too


Jacques

 From: "Bruno

Busco" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


Wonderfull !!!!

Looking forward to having

it !!! ;-)

This will let me also

define a more granular permissions to

simplify
the
interface for

not-so-skilled users.

-Bruno
2008/6/4 Adrian Crum

<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:


In the screen

widgets, you can check permissions with the



 <if-has-permission> or <if-service-permission>
elements. That's

fine
if
you
only need to check

a single permission to control access to the

entire
screen.

Things get

complicated when a screen's elements are controlled by

more
than
one permission.

Let's say you have a typical Edit Item screen. The

screen
should be viewable

only to users who have the VIEW permission.

Users
who
have the UPDATE

permission can edit the item. Users who have the

CREATE
permission see a

"New Item" button. Users who have DELETE

permission
see
a
"Delete

Item" button. Users who have the ADMIN permission have

unrestricted
access to the

screen. Wow. Five permission elements (and five

service
calls)
are needed to

control one screen.



Here's my

idea: have a permission service that returns ALL of the

user's
permissions in a

Map. You call the service with the permission to

check
-

 "ACCOUNTING" for example. The service returns a
Map containing all

of
the
user's

ACCOUNTING permissions stored as Boolean objects. Let's
say

the
returned Map is

called permissionsMap and the user has

ACCOUNTING_VIEW
and
ACCOUNTING_UPDATE

permissions, then the Map would contain these

elements:

CREATE=false
UPDATE=true
DELETE=false
VIEW=true
ADMIN=false

If the service

call is put in the screen's <actions> element,
then

the
Map
elements could be

used to control the display of screen widget

sections,
menu items, and

form fields.


Freemarker code

would be simpler too:


<#if

permissionsMap.CREATE>

<!-- Render a

Create New button -->

</#if>
<#if

permissionsMap.DELETE>

<!-- Render a

Delete button -->

</#if>

What do you think?

-Adrian















Reply via email to