[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FC-241?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16590754#comment-16590754
]
Shawn McKinney commented on FC-241:
-----------------------------------
This request has been made before. Checkout this ML thread:
[http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/directory-fortress/201508.mbox/%3C1165391088.3772297.1440711764934.JavaMail.zimbra%40psu.edu%3E]
Study the ARBAC02 model. Make a case that the current mapping, ou<->permobj is
incorrect. Perhaps better to take this conversation to the fortress ML to
build a consensus.
> Associate Organization Unit with Permission Operation mapping
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: FC-241
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FC-241
> Project: FORTRESS
> Issue Type: Wish
> Affects Versions: 2.0.1
> Reporter: Niket Kapadia
> Assignee: Shawn McKinney
> Priority: Major
> Labels: features
>
> Currently, as organizations are not associated with Permission Operation
> object. It is difficult to achieve enterprise-level multitenancy.
> If we associate organization ID with this. It is possible to have the
> different set of permission for the same system object for the different
> organizations.
>
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
