Hi Sanjeewa,

Can you post a chunk of code that benefits from this mapping in relation to
GDPR compliance? Basically I want to understand how a chunk of code that
wasn't GDPR compliant before becomes GDPR compliant due to this mapping.

I was under the impression that APIM v3.0 works on user ids and not on user
names. User names are only used in responses, UIs, for calling other
services, etc. Which means that this user id is anyway a pseudo name. The
reason for this decision was to address a set of problems in C4 products
such as inability to change a username, problems with the same user in
different cases, etc. Meaning that APIM v3 was already GDPR compliant in
that sense. It we now have to build an addition layer to make the code GDPR
compliant, we've basically lost our design objective of using user ids
instead of usernames.

Thanks,
NuwanD.

On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 6:05 PM, Sanjeewa Malalgoda <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Hi All,
> Recently we evaluated GDPR requirement(right to be forgotten) for API
> Manager 3.0.0 development. Our primary focus was to find a way to implement
> "right to be forgotten" without effecting core logic of the system(with
> minimum changes). Following is the design we came up. We will be able to
> utilize same design for other products(who used same development
> methodology) as well. In API Manager 3.0.0 we do have set of MSF4J based
> micro services. Then ReactJS based apps developed on top of these APIs.
> Micro services directly call API publisher, store and admin
> implementations(via APIs). So what we did was intercept each API call and
> change user name to pseudo name.
>
> To do this we have utility functions which maps real user to pseudo users
> and vise versa. It works like this.
>
>    - If pseudo name/username available in map then get mapping and return
>    mapped value.
>    - Else check mapping in database and load it to local map. Then return
>    mapped value.
>    - If mapping is not in database then add it to db and map. Then return
>    mapped value.
>
> And if we need to disable GDPR support due to some reason then above
> mentioned utility methods can return same attribute passed. Then it will
> not change anything and real user name will be used inside implementation.
>
> So as you can see in below image, API Manager implementation(boundary
> marked with green dash line) works only with pseudo name. Whenever it
> communicates with API layer or any other external system(two boxes
> connected to green box) we will change pseudo name to real user name. I
> have done a quick test with this implementation and now everything(logs, db
> entries, files etc) getting recorded with pseudo name. So whenever we need
> to delete user we just have to delete user and remove mapping. Our plan is
> to do same for light weight auth framework as well.
>
>
> ​​
>
> I would like to know others opinion on this before move forward.
>
> Thanks,
> sanjeewa.
> --
>
> *Sanjeewa Malalgoda*
> WSO2 Inc.
> Mobile : +94713068779 <+94%2071%20306%208779>
>
> <http://sanjeewamalalgoda.blogspot.com/>blog :http://sanjeewamalalgoda.
> blogspot.com/ <http://sanjeewamalalgoda.blogspot.com/>
>
>
>


-- 
Nuwan Dias

Software Architect - WSO2, Inc. http://wso2.com
email : [email protected]
Phone : +94 777 775 729
_______________________________________________
Architecture mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture

Reply via email to