> It would be nice to have a UI for them, a simple table
> based approach would do. The UI will need to be backed
> by some simple reader/writer classes and some model classes
> that the UI can bind to. At the moment model classes
> are missing and we're using Spring facilities to read the
> files, the write side is not there at all.
> For these, what about following the lead of the service
> configuration and have UserInfo objects, as well as
> LayerAccessRuleInfo and ServiceAccessRuleInfo, and have
> some security service providing access to those?
> Justin, can the service loading framework accomodate
> something that is not really a OGC service?
> 
The interfaces sound good. About using the ServiceInfo or an extension 
to provide access to them, not sure, sort of seems hacky. I would prefer 
breaking out a top level interface for that and make it a first class 
citizen, basically the same pattern as what we do for logging config now 
on trunk.

> UI wise, I would go for three table based pages.
> 
> The user one, would list users and roles, clicking
> you'd get to a panel allowing to edit user name,
> password (with confirmation) and roles using a
> palette component (the same used for extra styles in
> the layer configuration) listing the existing roles,
> but also allowing to provide new ones.
> While we're at it we can also introduce a toggle
> in the user file that can be used to add a encrypted
> password mode, that the UI would force by default:
> when the flag is raised, the passwords in the file
> would be encrypted (when missing, not encrypted,
> to allow for backwards compatibility).
> 
> The service layer one, a table with fixed sorting
> based on service and method and a list of roles,
> and single row editing UI very similar to the user
> one.
> 
> The per layer security one, again similar, forced
> sorting based on workspace, layer, access mode,
> simple editing form based on known workspaces,
> layers and access modes.
> 
> Hmmm.... to be honest, without going into the complexity
> of GEOXACML, I would prefer a rule system that did
> bind layer and service security into one single rule,
> something like:
> 
> namespace.layer.service.method.permission=ROLE_1[,ROLE_2][, ...]]
> 
> With the services we have atm, service and method
> pretty much state if you're reading or writing
> already, but for the sake of generality, let's
> keep the mode around, most of the time it
> would not be needed, but would still allow
> for a rule like:
> topp.*.WFS.*.w=ROLE_WRITER
> that is, allow WFS to write on the namespace "topp"
> only if you have the ROLE_WRITER role.
> 
> The temptation to also add filtering and column cherry
> picking in the mix is strong, but that would make
> things too complex for a property based configuration
> system, but this one seems obvious enough to be
> made on trunk and address a common and simple need.
> 
> Opinions? Should we just keep the security files
> as they are instead and leave every non trivial
> security setup to GEOXACML instead (even the mixing
> of service and layer access in a single rule?).
Yeah, my thought would be to leave things the way they are now, and wait 
to make this decision when we have a better idea of exactly what the 
GEOXACML implementation will look like.
> 
> Cheers
> Andrea
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Stay on top of everything new and different, both inside and 
> around Java (TM) technology - register by April 22, and save
> $200 on the JavaOne (SM) conference, June 2-5, 2009, San Francisco.
> 300 plus technical and hands-on sessions. Register today. 
> Use priority code J9JMT32. http://p.sf.net/sfu/p
> _______________________________________________
> Geoserver-devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel


-- 
Justin Deoliveira
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Enterprise support for open source geospatial.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stay on top of everything new and different, both inside and 
around Java (TM) technology - register by April 22, and save
$200 on the JavaOne (SM) conference, June 2-5, 2009, San Francisco.
300 plus technical and hands-on sessions. Register today. 
Use priority code J9JMT32. http://p.sf.net/sfu/p
_______________________________________________
Geoserver-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel

Reply via email to