On 6 Jul 2010, at 11:31, Alexander Klimetschek wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 12:24, Ian Boston <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 6 Jul 2010, at 10:15, Alexander Klimetschek wrote:
>> 
>>> On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 11:13, Alexander Klimetschek <[email protected]> 
>>> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 10:21, Ian Boston <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> A follow up on this, low level permissions wont work since they cant 
>>>>> discriminate between list children and get child.
>>>> 
>>>> Rereading your original mail now, I note that I didn't see that you
>>>> still want the sub nodes to be accessible. Then my answer is no
>>>> solution, of course ;-)
>>> 
>>> Actually principal-based access controls make my suggestion simpler to
>>> setup, especially the second point:
>> 
>> 
>> We still have the list all children problem here.
> 
> No. If userX has read/write access to /_user/ieb but not to /_user/a,
> /_user/b and all the other subnodes of /_user then node.getNodes()
> will only return /_user/ieb.

All users have read to /_user/<userid>  becuase there are public materials in 
/_user/<userid>
No users have list on /_user because of the policy.

Thats what I have to achieve.
Ian


> 
>> The data protection policy that is driving this is that, we have 50K users, 
>> all with user ID's we have to prevent anyone from getting a list of the user 
>> ID's, but still allow someone who knows the user ID to access the content. 
>> Its the same as the UserDir module in Apache httpd ie /~ieb
> 
> Regards,
> Alex
> 
> -- 
> Alexander Klimetschek
> [email protected]

Reply via email to