I think the discussion about the "process" versus "artifact" has
resulted in consideration of a "process" as one way to group
artifacts, so there is no need for separate items on this list that
explicitly handle processes (ie they are handled implicitly). Please
let me know if I'm misunderstanding that (especially Andrew, you've
been a big proponent of the process side of things).
On that note, are there any other patterns or specific security
requirements that others would like to discuss? I don't think this is
the sort of thing where we need to discuss the merits of each, unless
someone thinks that we shouldn't bother with supporting any of these
patterns. These should just be "socked away" somewhere and used while
we're doing the design so we have something to evaluate the design
alternatives to, and make sure they handle all of these scenarios (or
that we decide that a non-supported scenario is not important).
-David
On May 4, 2009, at 11:28 AM, David E Jones wrote:
This thread is specifically for discussing security requirements and
security use scenarios to drive OFBiz security functionality going
forward. Please keep other discussion in another thread.
These things tend to fall into two categories: functionality access
and record-level access, or a combination of both. That is a high
level generalization so just warning you that what I list below may
be limited by my own blindness since I usually think in terms of
those two things for security configuration. In other words, that's
the point of this brainstorming thread.
To get things started, here are a few I can think of and have heard
from others, these are in no particular order:
1. User X can use Artifact Y for anything that artifacts supports
and on any data (where "artifact" is a screen, web page, part of a
screen or page, service, general logic, etc)
2. User X can use Artifact Y only for records determined by
Constraint Z
3. User X can use any artifact for records determined by Constraint Z
4. Artifact Y can be used by any user for any purpose it supports
5. Artifact Y can be used by any user for only for records
determined by Constraint Z
6. User X can use any artifact for any record (ie superuser)
Okay, you can see that my initial pass at this is sort of an
enumeration of combinations effort. If you can think of other
general scenarios, please share! Also, please feel free to share
specific requirements that are not in such generic terms (we can
worry about putting them in more generic terms like this later).
Thank You!
-David