On 3 May 2006, at 17:45, James Adam wrote:

> There is no 'rails official' way of authenticating, or storing
> passwords, as this is logic specific to your application. Maybe hashed
> passwords aren't important? It's quite possible.

I'm currently playing with the idea of building a load of tools to  
make a Rails application OWASP compliant out of the box, and then try  
talking the Rails core into making it 'standard'. This stuff is so  
standard, there is no reason why we shouldn't be making it as  
standard-orientated as connecting to a database, and then give hooks  
for legacy authentication.

> The login engine isn't meant to be mashed into other applications
> which make their own assumptions about some kind of user model. It
> does try to be flexible where it can, but to some extent it's like
> asking a spanner to be a hammer. It's going to get ugly.

I've been able to get it to do some pretty weird stuff, but I agree  
it looks horrendous. My code is *ugly*, which isn't nice.

> I'd recommend that you pick one of these systems (login engine, or
> opinion) and then add whatever is missing from the other, within your
> application.

Alternatively, perhaps login_engine could have a webservices  
interface, and then opinion (and others) could talk to it via that?  
I'm happy to look at putting some code up for that...

--
Paul Robinson
_______________________________________________
engine-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.rails-engines.org/listinfo.cgi/engine-users-rails-engines.org

Reply via email to