On 17/04/2012 12:28, Fabio Martelli wrote:
> Il giorno 17/apr/2012, alle ore 11.58, Colm O hEigeartaigh ha scritto:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> A "resource" in Syncope is a remote directory of some sort where you
>> can propagate/synchronize attributes to/from.
>>
>> I'd like to consider an alternative definition of a "resource" in the
>> context of web services and if it's feasible or desirable to support
>> it.
>>
>> One can currently use Syncope to authenticate a web service request
>> (e.g. is the client's username/password valid) or for authorization,
>> where you can retrieve the authenticated client's roles, and check to
>> see whether one of these roles is allowed access the local "resource"
>> the client is attempting to access.
>>
>> In other words, the application server must maintain a map of role
>> names to resources, where the resource could be a combination of WSDL
>> target namespace, service name and operation, or a URI. There may also
>> be a permission associated with this mapping such as "read", "write"
>> or "execute", etc. Many IDM solutions can accept a resource as a
>> String or URI, so the question is whether this is something we should
>> add to the roadmap for Syncope or not?
>>
>> The advantage of adding this kind of functionality to Syncope is that
>> all identity and access management is done with the same product,
>> instead of having to use Syncope for authentication/retrieving-roles,
>> and use something else to find out whether the authenticated user has
>> the correct permissions to access the local resource.
>>
>> Thoughts? How would this kind of functionality work with Syncope?
> Hi Colm, if I well understood, you are suggesting to equip Syncope with some 
> Access Management functionalities, right?
> IMO this is a good idea and, looking at your proposal, probably not so 
> complicated to be implemented.
>
> Actually Syncope is still too much far away to act as complete Access Manager 
> but, for certain scenarios, what you described above cold be sufficient.
> For example, I was thinking to a web resource protected by something like an 
> agent that interact with Syncope to allow or deny access to its contents.
>
> I agree with you, I'd like to extend the roadmap by adding this kind of AM 
> features.

Colm (and Fabio),
this sounds like a very nice idea: nowadays the boundaries between pure
IdM and pure AM don't have much sense anymore.

Why don't we empower something we have "in house" like as Apache Shiro
as a starting base for providing upcoming Syncope AM features?

Regards.

-- 
Francesco Chicchiriccò

Apache Cocoon PMC and Apache Syncope PPMC Member
http://people.apache.org/~ilgrosso/

Reply via email to