From: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
To: "Fabian Grünbichler" <f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com>,
"PVE development discussion" <pve-devel@pve.proxmox.com>,
"Tim Marx" <t.marx@proxmox.com>
Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH v3 access-control] add ui capabilities endpoint
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2020 10:19:24 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <008ff748-78d4-ec63-9680-e6129cf7993d@proxmox.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1599724494.q0shm5qvme.astroid@nora.none>
On 10.09.20 10:00, Fabian Grünbichler wrote:
> On September 9, 2020 9:00 pm, Thomas Lamprecht wrote:
>> On 06.07.20 14:45, Tim Marx wrote:
>>> Signed-off-by: Tim Marx <t.marx@proxmox.com>
>>> ---
>>> * no changes
>>
>> Maybe we could merge this into the "/access/permissions" endpoint, maybe with a
>> "heurisitic" parameter?
>
> IIRC Dominik wanted to slowly replace the caps with permissions anyway,
> the caps are just (still) there because that hasn't happened yet.
>
I wanted that too sine a long time ;-) But that did not made it happen yet..
> I am also not sure whether tokens are a good fit for the regular Web GUI
> - the fact that tickets expire and you are not permanently logged in is
> a feature there IMHO ;)
nobody forces you to use it, and any user can just do the few modifications
and run the gui with tokens, artificial limits for such things are stupid IMO.
Further:
* and active log-out clears it, so people who use it and want to play safe can
do so. I mean, on most sites one is logged in for a few hours to even days,
so if you used a shared or not 100% trusted device you already need to
actively log out from all relevant sides, independent of they use self-expiring
tickets, or something else.
* It's effectively not advertised actively, so mostly for debug use for us.
We could show a hint if a token is entered, though.
"Tokes do not automatically expire, you need to actively log out for that."
> also, permissions has a return schema already, while it does 'match'
> from a structural point of view (a two-level deep hash), it is something
> altogether different semantically.
as the semantics are actively controlled by the requested via a switch that
does not matters much, IMO. They then actively request another semantic.
> TL;DR: iff we really need this, then I'd put it in a separate API call.
We could also just do the "cap heuristic calculation" in the frontend, using
the full permissions, and fill the Cap object with it.
This avoids a new api call or new multiplexer switch for an existing one but
does not needs to restructure the whole UI cap control, yet.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-09-10 8:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20200706124544.2126341-1-t.marx@proxmox.com>
2020-09-09 19:00 ` Thomas Lamprecht
2020-09-10 8:00 ` Fabian Grünbichler
2020-09-10 8:19 ` Thomas Lamprecht [this message]
2020-09-10 8:23 ` Fabian Grünbichler
2020-09-10 8:28 ` Thomas Lamprecht
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=008ff748-78d4-ec63-9680-e6129cf7993d@proxmox.com \
--to=t.lamprecht@proxmox.com \
--cc=f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com \
--cc=pve-devel@pve.proxmox.com \
--cc=t.marx@proxmox.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.