Jay, this solution doesn't play nice with inheritance.

Rafael Mendonça França
http://twitter.com/rafaelfranca
https://github.com/rafaelfranca



On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 10:59 AM, Jay Feldblum <[email protected]> wrote:

> In this type of case, it makes sense either to declare a whitelist or to
> declare a blacklist. But it doesn't make much sense to declare both of them.
>
> Solution #3: ActiveRecord (or ActiveModel) should raise if a class
> declares both a whitelist and a blacklist of mass-assignable attributes.
>
> class Comment
>     attr_accessible: title
>     attr_protected: author_id # raises immediately
> end
>
> Cheers,
> Jay
>
> On Monday, July 9, 2012 6:19:12 PM UTC-4, Uberbrady wrote:
>>
>> (I posted this as a bug in GitHub (https://github.com/rails/**
>> rails/issues/7018 <https://github.com/rails/rails/issues/7018>), but
>> then someone there told me I should post it here, so here it is.)
>>
>> If you set attr_accessible on some properties in an
>> ActiveRecord-descended class, and then attr_protected on others - the class
>> becomes 'default-open' - if any properties are missed or added later, they
>> will be accessible by default to MassAssignment.
>>
>> This undoes the entire point of having put attr_accessible in one's class.
>>
>> Two possible solutions -
>>
>> #1) 'default-closed' - the attr_protected statements will either be
>> ignored, or just used to override attr_accessiblefor a particular
>> property.
>> #2) 'explicit-only' - any attribute accessed in mass-assignment that is
>> not explicitly mentioned in eitherattr_accessible or attr_**protected raises
>> a new error - something like MassAssignmentError:**
>> AttributeNotExplicitlyDeclared**. Maybe even throw an error if the
>> attribute is accessed in*any* way (mything.whatever="boo"; # kerplow!
>> throws error?) though that might perform poorly.
>>
>> Solution #1 is probably fine - accesses to not attr_accessible properties
>> will throw a MassAssignment error under these circumstances anyways.
>> Solution #2 just makes things really explicit, which some might want for
>> some kinds of high-security applications.
>>
>> I found this bug in my own code during the development cycle; I liked
>> putting both attr_accessible andattr_**protected in for symmetry and to
>> remind me of my DB schema at the top. Stupid reason, I know. I found that a
>> belongs_to relation was unprotected in that circumstance.
>>
>> -B.
>>
>  --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rubyonrails-core/-/aqdzTPrnZTgJ.
>
> 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/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby 
on Rails: Core" 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/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.

Reply via email to