Nice idea, telling the wiki that the script is secure enought to be  
included from insecure document seems to be a very secure solution.  
But you should take care of deep inclusion, and what would be the  
logic ? B is set secure and have programming rights, A does not have  
programming rigths, C does and is insecure, do you consider that C has  
programming rights when included by A through B ?
That could be nice, imagine, C is a generic class runner, B choose the  
class, A is the user document. If A were able to include C, any class  
could be loaded, but through B, only those that B decide upon. Yes  
this could definitely be a nice solution, but it has to be design  
properly.

However, if you should go to this complexity, since we have supported  
the less secure option for long now in velocity, and this does not  
seems to have receive a bad feedback. So why not just treat groovy as  
we treat velocity since the beginning ?
Moreover, if I were to chose, since velocity programming does not  
require programming rights, I feel it is more sensible to get  
influenced than groovy could be, if you respect some simple security  
rules.

Denis
PS: I wonder if macro written in groovy requires programming rights...

On 28 nov. 08, at 15:13, Thomas Mortagne wrote:
>
> I totally agreed than we can't have two way of managing programming  
> rights here.
>
> But I'm not sure about what is the good answer.
>
> Use containing document to test programing rights:
>  * Cons:
>    - security: it means the groovy script has to be very careful of
> what it is doing because a document which include it can influence it
> be providing its and own objects.
>
>  * Pros:
>    - it makes possible to use groovy on private api for Sheet pages
> like users profiles sheet page in Deni's use case
>
> I see another solution: add some document's metadata indicating if the
> script can be included by some other document meaning that the
> programming rights can be tester on the included document or not. It
> would be false by default. This way someone with programming right can
> do some scipt in a page and explicitly indicate this can be used by
> non-programming document authors.
>
>> Thanks for your comments...
>>
>> Denis
>>
>> --
>> Denis Gervalle
>> SOFTEC sa
>> http://www.softec.st
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> devs mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
>>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Thomas Mortagne
> _______________________________________________
> devs mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs

_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs

Reply via email to