"Personally I would like to know proper name for it" I'd go for "Consistent UI design." Which, I admit, doesn't sound nearly as sexy as "improved security." BUt that is what you're doing: you're keeping the UI consistent with what the user is allowed to do.
Another way to put it is "don't tease the users." Don't let them think they can edit data, when they can't. Greg On Aug 11, 5:04 pm, Ladislav Gazo <[email protected]> wrote: > Personally I would like to know proper name for it, if you would be so > kind and give us some proposals we will consider it as your > contribution to the process of making acris-(currently named)-security > better :) We initially thought that 'security' also covers > transferring server-side security restrictions to the client so the > user is also satisfied (hiding components, ability to login, have some > basic components available in GWT,...) but we might be mistaken about > the name... > > And also please consider that acris-security (if you haven't been able > to find it somewhere in the documentation I will fill it in) is/is > trying/and would also provide ways how to transparently switch the > server side security implementation. Maybe there (or somewhere else) > is a possibility where we could cooperate, what would you say? > > On 11. Aug, 23:31 h., Greg Dougherty <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Hi Peter. > > > Not to be rude, but who cares? > > > Who cares if the user can see a screen that says "Client Data", when > > the user can't actually download any of that client data? > > > IOW, what's the point? If your sever is properly secured, then users > > who aren't allowed to see the client data won't be sent it, and users > > who aren't allowed to modify the data will have their modification > > requests denied. If it isn't properly secured, then what AcrIS does > > is pointless. no? > > > Yes, it's nice from the UI perspective to let the user know why they > > can't see / change the data, but what in the world does that have to > > do with "security"? > > > Greg > > > On Aug 11, 9:33 am, Peter Simun <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hi Stefan, > > > > of course, client side code could never be secured! AcrIS security > > > fully depends also on securing the RPC services (on the server side, > > > client side security is an complementary security - some kind of nice > > > to have security) > > > The goal is: if the user does not have rights to see some parts of the > > > screens, it won't be displayed. If the user is not able to modify the > > > data, he will see the readonly components. > > > Anyway, server side security is also checking if the user is able to > > > execute methods or if he is able to modify/see data he are reguesting. > > > > This coupled approached gives you completly secured solution for GWT > > > applications. > > > > Peter > > > > On 11. Aug, 16:07 h., Stefan Bachert <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Hi Peter, > > > > > I had just a glance at acris. > > > > Acris is talking about a client side part. > > > > > No mechanism which depends on client side code could be secure! > > > > > So I would suspect acris to be a misconsception. > > > > At the moment I do not spend time to exactly find out what is wrong > > > > with acris. > > > > > Stefan Bacherthttp://gwtworld.de > > > > > On 11 Aug., 15:47, Peter Simun <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Luis, why do you think that there is no security there? > > > > > > Please, read the article again and carefully, or go on the wiki > > > > > pages:http://code.google.com/p/acris/wiki/Security > > > > > > Peter > > > > > > On 11. Aug, 14:04 h., Luis Daniel Mesa Velasquez > > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > I don't see anything about the encryption used in the RPC call to > > > > > > the > > > > > > userservice... so it's just a fancy 3rd party RPC call, no security > > > > > > there... > > > > > > > On Aug 10, 3:20 am, Peter Simun <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > I just wanted to share with you the article about security in GWT > > > > > > > application.http://java.dzone.com/articles/securing-gwt-client-acris > > > > > > > > Serious security implementation is something that was missing > > > > > > > almost > > > > > > > to each GWT developer. I saw many topics here in the forum about > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > security, so maybe it will helps you to implement security in a > > > > > > > correct way. > > > > > > > > Peter -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Web Toolkit" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.
