Hey there,
In relation to how GeoFence/ACL need to define and evaluate data access rules, there’s something that’s been itching on my neck. I tried to summarize here:
https://github.com/camptocamp/geoserver-acl/issues/1
It’d be great if you guys can give it a read and spot some fundamental thing I might be missing?
TIA!
Gabe
camptocamp
INNOVATIVE SOLUTIONS
BY OPEN SOURCE EXPERTS
Gabriel Roldan
Geospatial Developer
Hi Gabriel,
I guess that with your model you are losing some flexibility wrt GeoFence:
Fact is, the LIMIT and ALLOW rules may have different matching scopes,
Just one example: let’s say, you have a layer L1 that needs to be limited to area A1 for everyone except for group G1
In GeoFence you’ll create these rules with a high priority, such as for instance
Rule 10: Layer L1, Grant: LIMIT, Area A1
Rule >10: Group G1, Layer L1, Grant: ALLOW, Area whole world
… then you can have other rules totally limiting the access to layer L1 or whatever
With your semantic change, you’ll have to repeat Rule 10 for each group/user in your rulebase.
This means that, for each group you create, you need to remember that layer L1 requires area limitation (and then create the related rule).
Cheers,
Emanuele
Ing. Emanuele Tajariol
Technical Lead
GeoSolutions Group
mobile: +39 347 7895230
office: +39 0584 962313
fax: +39 0584 1660272
Con riferimento alla normativa sul trattamento dei dati personali (Reg. UE 2016/679 - Regolamento generale sulla protezione dei dati “GDPR”), si precisa che ogni circostanza inerente alla presente email (il suo contenuto, gli eventuali allegati, etc.) è un dato la cui conoscenza è riservata al/i solo/i destinatario/i indicati dallo scrivente. Se il messaggio Le è giunto per errore, è tenuta/o a cancellarlo, ogni altra operazione è illecita. Le sarei comunque grato se potesse darmene notizia.
This email is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. We remind that - as provided by European Regulation 2016/679 “GDPR” - copying, dissemination or use of this e-mail or the information herein by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify us immediately by telephone or e-mail.
Hey Emanuele, thanks for looking into this.
Thinking about your analysis I still can’t see why you
couldn’t set up the exact same rule set, maybe there’s
something not clear in my explanation. Updated the graphics
to represent restrictions with notes to avoid confusion.
Maybe LayerRule should extend AllowRule directly and be a
sibling of LimitRule. That’d be a better approximation to the
current model where class hierarchy only enforces the semantics.
Then I guess given the case it’d boil down to whether the merge
process respects the current algorithm.
In any case I don’t want to borrow more time from you for this,
thanks again for looking into it. I might bother again when/if I
decide to move forward, but for the time being there’s enough
on my plate, I just didn’t want to lose that train of thought.
Cheers,
Gabriel
camptocamp
INNOVATIVE SOLUTIONS
BY OPEN SOURCE EXPERTS
Gabriel Roldan
Geospatial Developer