Can anyone point me any site/forum which allow you to edit others
comment(not approve/reject or delete entire comment). I'm just curious :)
Think what will happen when someone comment on your blogs, media etc(or
even you can think of product comments of most common e commerce
platforms).  It will go through approval process or filter and then publish.

If we allow someone to edit others comments its a crime IMO :). Hence -1
for let someone to edit/update others comment.

Thanks,
sanjeewa.



On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 11:04 AM, Nuwan Dias <[email protected]> wrote:

> I think standard forums allow privileged users to moderate comments.
> Moderation can be in the form of approving/rejecting comments or in the
> form of removing obscene type of comments.
>
> If we go down the workflow (approval) path, there's much to implement. Ex:
> We need to introduce a "state" to the comment, need to implement a
> workflow, a callback mechanism, a workflow cleanup, etc. But if we just
> write a piece of code which allows a pre-configured role to remove, edit
> comments, I think the implementation is much simpler.
>
> On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 10:52 AM, Sanjeewa Malalgoda <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 10:43 AM, Bhathiya Jayasekara <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Sanjeewa,
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 5:09 PM, Sanjeewa Malalgoda <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I don't think its worth to get complete permission model for comments
>>>> as well. Like bhathiya mentioned only comment owner is allowed to
>>>> update/delete his comment. That is the normal behavior. Also i feel its
>>>> better if we can have work flow support for comments(by default this need
>>>> to disabled). Once something posted if we let someone else to modify its
>>>> not nice.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Admin or similar role might be needing moderator capability for
>>> comments. WDYT? To support that we can easily use existing permission
>>> model.
>>>
>> I haven't see a single website or forum which allows one person to edit
>> others comments. We cannot edit or update any others comment :) Its not
>> Only thing admin or other person can do is approve/reject comment or delete
>> it. It means workflow + delete permission to only super user. WDYT?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> sanjeewa.
>>
>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Bhathiya
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> sanjeewa.
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 11:20 AM, Fazlan Nazeem <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Nuwan/Bhathiya,
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 10:19 AM, Nuwan Dias <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I think what Bhathiya is suggesting is to bring in our usual
>>>>>> permissions model (in APIM 3.0.0) to comments as well. This will require
>>>>>> more data to be saved in the DB but will address the issue at hand.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Are you suggesting we should have an extra column in Comments table in
>>>>> the db to fulfill this?
>>>>>
>>>>> I am thinking of using the AM_API_PERMISSION column introduced in
>>>>> AM_API table to decide on who can update/delete a specific comment. Apart
>>>>> from the user who commented, If a user can delete or update an API he can
>>>>> delete/update any comment for that API. This way we do not need to save
>>>>> extra information in the db, and can use the api permission information to
>>>>> control the comment actions.
>>>>>
>>>>> There are two levels of permissions required here. One is "who can
>>>>>> add/update/remove comments in general" and the other is "whose comments 
>>>>>> can
>>>>>> I update/remove".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The first can be simply achieved using scopes. Basically say which
>>>>>> scope is permitted for the /comments API. The second can be solved by 
>>>>>> using
>>>>>> our usual permission model in APIM v3.0.0.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 10:10 AM, Ayyoob Hamza <[email protected]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This won't tackle the problem Musthaq suggested which requires
>>>>>>> validation in the backend.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *Ayyoob Hamza*
>>>>>>> *Senior Software Engineer*
>>>>>>> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.com
>>>>>>> email: [email protected] cell: +94 77 1681010 <%2B94%2077%207779495>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 10:01 AM, Ayyoob Hamza <[email protected]>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> We had a similar requirement to have a fine grained access for
>>>>>>>> users in IoTS and we went with the approach of assigning permission for
>>>>>>>> scope rather than roles.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *Ayyoob Hamza*
>>>>>>>> *Senior Software Engineer*
>>>>>>>> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.com
>>>>>>>> email: [email protected] cell: +94 77 1681010 <%2B94%2077%207779495>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 9:51 AM, Mushthaq Rumy <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi Prasanna/Pubudu,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I think if we use scope based validation there will be an issue
>>>>>>>>> here. Lets take the same example.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> *GET /apis/{apiId}/comments/{commentId}              -
>>>>>>>>>  comment-add-scopeDELETE /apis/{apiId}/documents/{documentId}      -
>>>>>>>>>  comment-delete-scopeUPDATE /apis/{apiId}/documents/{documentId}      
>>>>>>>>> -
>>>>>>>>>  comment-update-scope*
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Scope and roles matching are as follows.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> *comment-add-scope : subscriber-role, **admin-role*
>>>>>>>>> *comment-**update**-scope :  **subscriber-role, **admin-role*
>>>>>>>>> *comment-delete-scope : **admin-role*
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Lets say there are two store users *A* and *B* who have the 
>>>>>>>>> *subscriber-role.
>>>>>>>>> *And user *A* adds a comment to an API (*comment-add-scope*).
>>>>>>>>> Then user *B *logs in and he will be able to update that
>>>>>>>>> particular comment which user *A *has added since user *B *has
>>>>>>>>> the *subscriber-role* too.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> IMO this should not be allowed. AFAIC we might have to go with
>>>>>>>>> user validation.
>>>>>>>>> If we can get the logged in user's roles and if that user has
>>>>>>>>> admin-role or that particular comment is added by the logged in user 
>>>>>>>>> we can
>>>>>>>>> allow this user to update or delete the comment. WDYT?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks & Regards,
>>>>>>>>> Mushthaq
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 6:31 AM, Prasanna Dangalla <
>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hi Fazlan,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I think as Ishara and Pubudu have mentioned we can use the scope
>>>>>>>>>> validation.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 12:03 AM, Pubudu Gunatilaka <
>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> + Adding architecture mail group
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 11:59 PM, Pubudu Gunatilaka <
>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Fazlan,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> As Ishara mentioned above, we can do this with scope
>>>>>>>>>>>> validation. Each and every resource has a scope. The scope is 
>>>>>>>>>>>> associated
>>>>>>>>>>>> with one or more roles. Consider the following example.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Resource and scope matching are as follows.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> *GET /apis/{apiId}/comments/{commentId}              -
>>>>>>>>>>>>  comment-add-scopeDELETE /apis/{apiId}/documents/{documentId}      
>>>>>>>>>>>> -
>>>>>>>>>>>>  comment-manage-scopeUPDATE /apis/{apiId}/documents/{documentId}   
>>>>>>>>>>>>    -
>>>>>>>>>>>>  comment-manage-scope*
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Scope and roles matching are as follows.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> *comment-add-scope : subscriber-role, **admin-role*
>>>>>>>>>>>> *comment-manage-scope :  admin-role*
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> @Pubudu:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> IMO a person who adds a comment should have the UPDATE privilege
>>>>>>>>>> as well. DELETE can be restricted to admin. Like wise we might find 
>>>>>>>>>> many
>>>>>>>>>> combinations with different use cases. So I think its better to 
>>>>>>>>>> decouple
>>>>>>>>>> this  *comment-manage-scope *to two different scopes as
>>>>>>>>>> *comment-update-scope *and *comment-delete-scope. *If we do
>>>>>>>>>> this, we can assign it to respective roles in scope and role mapping 
>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>> different use cases.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>>>>> Prasanna
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> When a user hits the GET resource we can do the following.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. Retrieve the scope of the resource
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Retrieve the roles of the scope
>>>>>>>>>>>> 3. Validate the user based on the role and allow or deny the
>>>>>>>>>>>> request.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you!
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 5:04 PM, Fazlan Nazeem <[email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 3:59 PM, Ishara Cooray <
>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How about introducing scope based permission model?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We can define scope for each resource and validate against
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the logged in user scopes.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This way we can let the admin to edit the scope so that he
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can fine grain the access to these resources.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> My understanding is, with scopes what we can decide is whether
>>>>>>>>>>>>> a particular user has access to hit an API resource URL. In my 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> example all
>>>>>>>>>>>>> users with subscriber scope will have access to hit the api, but 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> question is, out of those subscribers how do we choose the right 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> subscriber
>>>>>>>>>>>>> for the right action.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks & Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ishara Cooray
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Senior Software Engineer
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mobile : +9477 262 9512 <+94%2077%20262%209512>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WSO2, Inc. | http://wso2.com/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lean . Enterprise . Middleware
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 3:42 PM, Fazlan Nazeem <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is about how we should handle access permission for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> subresources in api store.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Parent Resource Access *
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Consider the following REST calls.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GET /apis/{apiId}/comments/{commentId}
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GET apis/{apiId}/documents/{documentId}
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> At the moment we are not checking whether a particular user
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> has read access to the specific api before we retrieve the 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> requested
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> comment or document. Is it fine to ignore this check for these 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> apis
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> assuming that a user might be already having read access to the 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> api because
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> he already knows the uuid of the api?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Or should we be doing an explicit permission validation? Do
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we have any drawbacks in doing this check?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Subresource Update/Delete*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Consider the following REST api calls done by a user in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> store.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> DELETE /apis/{apiId}/comments/{commentId}
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> UPDATE /apis/{apiId}/comments/{commentId}
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> DELETE /apis/{apiId}/documents/{documentId}
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> UPDATE /apis/{apiId}/documents/{documentId}
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In order to restrict who can update and delete these
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> subresources, we can pass the username to DAO layer and check 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> who created
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it, and allow only that person to do these modifications. But 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there could
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be a use-case where another user(admin) will need to delete or 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> update a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resource created by someone else. If we restrict only the 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> creator to do
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> these actions, then we cannot support such a use-case.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Appreciate your thoughts on this.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks & Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fazlan Nazeem
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Senior Software Engineer*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *WSO2 Inc*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mobile : +94772338839
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <%2B94%20%280%29%20773%20451194>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks & Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fazlan Nazeem
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Senior Software Engineer*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> *WSO2 Inc*
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mobile : +94772338839
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <%2B94%20%280%29%20773%20451194>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>> *Pubudu Gunatilaka*
>>>>>>>>>>>> Committer and PMC Member - Apache Stratos
>>>>>>>>>>>> Software Engineer
>>>>>>>>>>>> WSO2, Inc.: http://wso2.com
>>>>>>>>>>>> mobile : +94774078049 <%2B94772207163>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> *Pubudu Gunatilaka*
>>>>>>>>>>> Committer and PMC Member - Apache Stratos
>>>>>>>>>>> Software Engineer
>>>>>>>>>>> WSO2, Inc.: http://wso2.com
>>>>>>>>>>> mobile : +94774078049 <%2B94772207163>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>> Architecture mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>> Architecture mailing list
>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Mushthaq Rumy
>>>>>>>>> *Software Engineer*
>>>>>>>>> Mobile : +94 (0) 779 492140 <%2B94%20%280%29%20773%20451194>
>>>>>>>>> Email : [email protected]
>>>>>>>>> WSO2, Inc.; http://wso2.com/
>>>>>>>>> lean . enterprise . middleware.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> <http://wso2.com/signature>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> Architecture mailing list
>>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Architecture mailing list
>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Nuwan Dias
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Software Architect - WSO2, Inc. http://wso2.com
>>>>>> email : [email protected]
>>>>>> Phone : +94 777 775 729 <+94%2077%20777%205729>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Architecture mailing list
>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Thanks & Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Fazlan Nazeem
>>>>>
>>>>> *Senior Software Engineer*
>>>>>
>>>>> *WSO2 Inc*
>>>>> Mobile : +94772338839
>>>>> <%2B94%20%280%29%20773%20451194>
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Architecture mailing list
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> *Sanjeewa Malalgoda*
>>>> WSO2 Inc.
>>>> Mobile : +94713068779 <071%20306%208779>
>>>>
>>>> <http://sanjeewamalalgoda.blogspot.com/>blog
>>>> :http://sanjeewamalalgoda.blogspot.com/
>>>> <http://sanjeewamalalgoda.blogspot.com/>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Architecture mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> *Bhathiya Jayasekara*
>>> *Associate Technical Lead,*
>>> *WSO2 inc., http://wso2.com <http://wso2.com>*
>>>
>>> *Phone: +94715478185 <071%20547%208185>*
>>> *LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/bhathiyaj
>>> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/bhathiyaj>*
>>> *Twitter: https://twitter.com/bhathiyax <https://twitter.com/bhathiyax>*
>>> *Blog: http://movingaheadblog.blogspot.com
>>> <http://movingaheadblog.blogspot.com/>*
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> *Sanjeewa Malalgoda*
>> WSO2 Inc.
>> Mobile : +94713068779 <+94%2071%20306%208779>
>>
>> <http://sanjeewamalalgoda.blogspot.com/>blog
>> :http://sanjeewamalalgoda.blogspot.com/
>> <http://sanjeewamalalgoda.blogspot.com/>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Architecture mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Nuwan Dias
>
> Software Architect - WSO2, Inc. http://wso2.com
> email : [email protected]
> Phone : +94 777 775 729 <077%20777%205729>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Architecture mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>
>


-- 

*Sanjeewa Malalgoda*
WSO2 Inc.
Mobile : +94713068779 <071%20306%208779>

<http://sanjeewamalalgoda.blogspot.com/>blog :http://sanjeewamalalgoda.
blogspot.com/ <http://sanjeewamalalgoda.blogspot.com/>
_______________________________________________
Architecture mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture

Reply via email to