so i'd go for @PreSecures and @PostSecures, just explicit

but i wouldn't something not symmetrical

Romain Manni-Bucau
Twitter: @rmannibucau
Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau



2012/12/13 Arne Limburg <[email protected]>:
> @Secures sounds cool at a first glance, but may it be confusing for users?
>
>
> And also we should support a mixture of @SecurityParameterBindings and
> result, so the annotation should somehow indicate that the parameter is
> the return value of the method invocation.
> Consider the following example:
>
> @Copy
> public MyObject copy(@Source MyObject source) {
>   ...
> }
>
> public class MyCopyAuthorizer {
>
>   @Secures @Copy
>   public boolean isCopyAllowed(@Source MyObject source,
> @SecuredReturnValue MyObject target) {
>     ...
>   }
> }
>
> where @Copy is a @SecurityBindingType and @Source is a
> @SecurityParameterBinding
>
> Cheers,
> Arne
>
> Am 13.12.12 11:45 schrieb "Romain Manni-Bucau" unter
> <[email protected]>:
>
>>Why @Secures is not fine?
>>
>>if the rule is "on parameter" it is a post it can be enough.
>>
>>Another solution is @Secure(hook = POST) with a default to PRE
>>
>>Romain Manni-Bucau
>>Twitter: @rmannibucau
>>Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
>>LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
>>Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>
>>
>>
>>2012/12/13 Arne Limburg <[email protected]>:
>>> Feel free to make a suggestion.
>>> What about
>>>
>>> @SecuredResult
>>> or
>>> @SecuredReturnValue
>>> ?
>>>
>>> Am 13.12.12 10:50 schrieb "Gerhard Petracek" unter
>>> <[email protected]>:
>>>
>>>>+1, but imo we need a better name for it.
>>>>
>>>>regards,
>>>>gerhard
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>2012/12/13 Rudy De Busscher <[email protected]>
>>>>
>>>>> All,
>>>>>
>>>>> I had once also such a requirement (post-method authorization) where
>>>>>this
>>>>> could be very handy.
>>>>>
>>>>> We kept information about persons (name, age, address, medical info,
>>>>>...)
>>>>> but there where some categories. One kind of category was linked to
>>>>>the
>>>>> Royals and you needed a special role before you could read the
>>>>>information.
>>>>>
>>>>> So we where only able to determine if the user was allowed to read the
>>>>> person information after we had read it frmo the database and matched
>>>>>the
>>>>> category.
>>>>>
>>>>> So
>>>>> +1
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards
>>>>> Rudy
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 13 December 2012 09:26, Arne Limburg <[email protected]
>>>>> >wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> > Hi Jean-Louis,
>>>>> >
>>>>> > A simple use case is a method that creates an object, stores it to
>>>>>the
>>>>> > database and returns it.
>>>>> > You may want to check the object to decide if the user is allowed to
>>>>> > create it. With my proposal it is as easy as:
>>>>> >
>>>>> > public class MyObjectRepository {
>>>>> >   @Create
>>>>> >   public MyObject create() {
>>>>> >      ...
>>>>> >   }
>>>>> > }
>>>>> >
>>>>> > public class MyAuthorizer {
>>>>> >
>>>>> >   @Secures @Create
>>>>> >   public boolean canCreate(@Result MyObject object) {
>>>>> >     // security check here
>>>>> >   }
>>>>> > }
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Hope that makes it clear. And note that the check may depend on the
>>>>>state
>>>>> > of the object, i.e. the user is just allowed to create the object,
>>>>>if
>>>>>he
>>>>> > is the owner...
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Cheers,
>>>>> > Arne
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Am 13.12.12 09:20 schrieb "Jean-Louis MONTEIRO" unter <
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> > >:
>>>>> >
>>>>> > >Hi Arne,
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > >Just read the JIRA but could not find a relevant use case for that.
>>>>> > >But if you proposed it, I probably missed something so if you could
>>>>> > >elaborate a bit more.
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > >Jean-Louis
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > >2012/12/13 Mark Struberg <[email protected]>
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > >>
>>>>> > >>
>>>>> > >> +1
>>>>> > >>
>>>>> > >>
>>>>> > >> ------------------------------
>>>>> > >> Arne Limburg schrieb am Mi., 12. Dez 2012 23:38 PST:
>>>>> > >>
>>>>> > >> >Hi,
>>>>> > >> >
>>>>> > >> >What do you think of supporting post-method-authorization (see
>>>>>[1])
>>>>> in
>>>>> > >> addition to our current pre-method-authorization?
>>>>> > >> >I just started coding it and it is not much to do.
>>>>> > >> >
>>>>> > >> >Cheers,
>>>>> > >> >Arne
>>>>> > >> >
>>>>> > >> >[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DELTASPIKE-298
>>>>> > >> >
>>>>> > >>
>>>>> > >>
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > >--
>>>>> > >Jean-Louis
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>>
>>>
>

Reply via email to