On 14/11/2009 11:15, Jan Thiemo Fricke wrote:
Hi list members,
I use a openldap server for the user management of an proprietary
client/server application.
Users are modified person class objects.
Groups are groupOfName objects.
Rights are also groupOfNames.
* *
Users are members of groups and groups are members of rights.
To exemplify my problem:
User: cn=example,ou=users,dc=mydomain
Group: cn=supervisors,ou=groups,dc=mydomain
Right: cn=someRight,ou=rights,dc=mydomain
For instance someRight should give all members of supervisors the right
to modify other users.
At the moment the ACL is related to the group.
Access to dn.sub=”ou=users,dc=mydomain”
By group.exact=”cn=supervisor,ou=groups,dc=mydomain” write
By self read
To use the rights I’d need an ACL with a group of group.
Access to dn.sub=”ou=users,dc=mydomain”
By group.exact=”cn=someRight,ou=rights,dc=mydomain” write
Should allow all members of all groups that are member of someRight to
modify users.
Is this possible or is groupOfNames the wrong class to represent group
rights?
Hi,
This can be acheived using ACL sets. There is in fact an example of
exactly this use case in the admin guide!
http://www.openldap.org/doc/admin24/access-control.html#Sets - Granting rights
based on relationships
It is noted in the documentation that sets are experimental. Just to add
a word onto that, I use sets in several production environments, and
have absolutely no stability problems.
However, depending on the sets you use, the performance hit can be
important (sets can fire off thousands of search requests just to
evaluate one ACL, if they're badly written). Also, ACLs with sets are
not cached.
Hope this helps,
Jonathan
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
Jonathan Clarke - [email protected]
--------------------------------------------------------------
Ldap Synchronization Connector (LSC) - http://lsc-project.org
--------------------------------------------------------------
