Yeah, I'm pretty sure this was intentional. Security admin privileges should be 
very explicit and not part of any general group.

I think the intention of the PARTYADMIN group was for general party 
administration, but NOT the security administration side of parties.

We should discuss this, but I think the most flexible and secure would be to 
remove this and create a SECURITYADMIN group that has this permission for easy 
application when needed.

-David


[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: sichen
Date: Tue Jul 31 15:09:15 2007
New Revision: 561569

URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&rev=561569
Log:
Not sure if this is intentional or a bug, so here's my fix.  The PARTYADMIN 
user actually could not set security permissions for any of the users, and 
there was no SECURITY permission group that I could find

Modified:
    ofbiz/trunk/applications/party/data/PartySecurityData.xml

Modified: ofbiz/trunk/applications/party/data/PartySecurityData.xml
URL: 
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/applications/party/data/PartySecurityData.xml?view=diff&rev=561569&r1=561568&r2=561569
==============================================================================
--- ofbiz/trunk/applications/party/data/PartySecurityData.xml (original)
+++ ofbiz/trunk/applications/party/data/PartySecurityData.xml Tue Jul 31 
15:09:15 2007
@@ -84,4 +84,7 @@
     <SecurityGroupPermission groupId="FLEXADMIN" 
permissionId="SECURITY_UPDATE"/>
     <SecurityGroupPermission groupId="FLEXADMIN" permissionId="SECURITY_VIEW"/>
     <SecurityGroupPermission groupId="VIEWADMIN" permissionId="SECURITY_VIEW"/>
+
+    <SecurityGroupPermission groupId="PARTYADMIN" 
permissionId="SECURITY_ADMIN"/>
+
 </entity-engine-xml>


Reply via email to