[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Chronological]
[Thread]
[Top]
Re: role based authorization -> dynacl module?
- To: openldap-technical@openldap.org
- Subject: Re: role based authorization -> dynacl module?
- From: Michael Ströder <michael@stroeder.com>
- Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 17:04:39 +0200
- Autocrypt: addr=michael@stroeder.com; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= xsBNBFbdnRoBCADj0vYA4aRwKJ6AE4mf8oElLgMT/1eLNKpJ2FYBWcwj9d8dTk5/p9b8DRxy S/qQIUUZqt9xRFZwUCm0vFeQMRDeN9xzAKoRzrJifoDOacOjG1lhZTKYvVZGgUT89Ao3QeHh Q7gPzcAKNoueoR2y3FXStOYuRrbk5PlSjVAITjsotgc7PWE9mmVYpeu8a+byK/DBHKUyolOA 1UXYvDa7MbPhMtdNm8qnwtKs1Vsyk1VkErM+5cIe+zTT6WYQcmZMRjCtWGiFTzk9W6Mdlskk WRTKhKNgokTsgcy1ecaCBUZWxv/SyXgD81+rwRi9b8Px+1reg43ayxi8sV7jrI1feybbABEB AAHNJ01pY2hhZWwgU3Ryw7ZkZXIgPG1pY2hhZWxAc3Ryb2VkZXIuY29tPsLAdwQTAQgAIQUC Vt2dGgIbAwULCQgHAgYVCAkKCwIEFgIDAQIeAQIXgAAKCRAH3HrjaovJOFpTCACjO773gcmJ KvzjiNpUFl/gANyaJgIq4VbMQ7VthRb1F9X6YbdJ6Z99ntyESjGFCpjofcSomr2vJDpv6ht+ lY33yo20YwsMpqe2OeId0jPybG+FtabKjgBNoAk7iqnBGUvE4t0dz0n1LQVCQR2jxyTKmcNq OYpsRZ3H+6kWwJMuVgsNZglINVZ8JgV5QuLYN5jhYz+pOuFnU11bV6nWREvzZXzebe7g7Zus 6AsWjtJ0lDvgBNzLlF3/eFrVch6Bejs0SvuFseIdZQk+4YU6Rb8xul/jDFXIfo7eTmijO3dV T5AmC1cUi8czncwpgAJnEH8vYv23RoN/aw2gSMCS2huIzsBNBFbdnRoBCAC7L1cTVBVZZuM/ yxSUM5CsgGBlTD1Cr7C2ngZFsHSYXVLq6NUB8GZA2iLK96CrwnFw4/Jjz4llOjc50iVRMQKL RyFWOJAMrpPq2ew5T+Uoo524D//dwVbqkFVVuvM8NPiKIDyPGCjP+acM1D8hXwhOXgQ8Iz8Q 3/GRSYjitn9JrkF0ia2nhariznBKVu0LDffxF/hOCx45+QRR2/rYYlshfZMB7nEJX9P+hVfM CSzltz9Z8CldeUbiJvnyrISReR2XBw9oh8JkIUP0BtpIaify9A7EfzOk+W9BUnWe+YwdSUsB fJxOhSv+umyW5GMqZGFu+4oYnkzbe+1LUs1JarCtABEBAAHCwF8EGAEIAAkFAlbdnRoCGwwA CgkQB9x642qLyTjEUgf+JX6Atatl/QKe37yCj1OZYNPd3B0rPLJRF5mEmrADRXLZC9+uFeDS Wxxln040gnR6rjBHrRcvVmlTDiZY26iuL16+V+0/aZ9uyXNQSzk2cwDSiI/8gvr72Y+FN5fh cGXpeNHxHilYc9onzDhxyE76cwzqTKm4q2ULIH2u9IHQ5O86Fv6nHPYhe2fy1bhQapNwi/Xl 3G3i2WNH/w7m+1zWU1IddZOjmXzoxLT1BATwXGa0Tt5RjVb2mM1Wg3Zj6kqFkF2vvKcvrwj0 q0Ap5uyfN5m0uWzQMCMoaV9HQf7f5MkS1lnwBqDgnojjVAieX5uk7olUiRuPKHMfhvXulYP8 AA==
- In-reply-to: <E2CF563F-24E4-4B9D-9AA2-E055E54E408C@symas.com>
- Openpgp: id=43C8730E84A20E560722806C07DC7AE36A8BC938
- References: <feb332f1-c05d-ba57-3d3b-63887434d6f9@univention.de> <E2CF563F-24E4-4B9D-9AA2-E055E54E408C@symas.com>
- User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 SeaMonkey/2.49.2
Shawn McKinney wrote:
> Why use ACL’s for fine-grained authZ?
>
> It’s drawbacks,
> - Not standard / LDAPv3 server lock-in (might not be a problem for you)
> - difficult to maintain and test (complex)
You have both of these issues for every non-trivial access control
system. Especially you need automated tests.
> To determine if necessary another question - how are your
> applications interacting with the directory. Are they connecting
> using LDAPv3 operations (like search and bind), or is there are
> higher level abstraction in place, (like mod_authnz_ldap)?
That's the real question: Does the end-user ever impersonate directly on
the LDAP connection (optionally via a web application).
Ciao, Michael.