+1 for providing the capability.

Are we going to define permissions per environment or are there going to be
static set of environments?
There is a similar mail for Cassandra in [Architecture] Supporting multiple
environments for Cassandra.

IMO permissions you have mentioned are too high level for this.  It's more
practical to associate permissions with a specific database.  So having
only 'Read' permission (for example) would not allow this.

Then if you consider a particular database, real deployment scenarios would
want to control who can perform CRUD on that database.
So I feel XACML type of an approach is far more practical and extensible
here.




On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 11:06 AM, Dhanuka Ranasinghe <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Since SS 1.1.0 we do support concepts of environments. There can be
> multiple database server instances in single environment. So according to
> above use case, there can be multiple database server instances (R&D and
> maintenance ) for Development environment. At the moment any user can
> access any environment, configured in SS, but we need to control who and
> how they gonna access these environment. that is the whole purpose of RBAC.
>
> So far we have identified four permissions.
>
> 1. Access (Read)
> 2. Create
> 3. Modify
> 4. Delete
>
> These permissions should be assigned to user Roles against environments.
> By doing that we can check whether particular user has permission to access
> the environment.
>
> Cheers,
> Dhanuka
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Architecture mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>
>


-- 
/sumedha
m: +94 773017743
b :  bit.ly/sumedha
_______________________________________________
Architecture mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture

Reply via email to