Florent Guillaume wrote:
When doing user.getRoles(). Because as Tres said more clearly than me,
every user can do what the Anonymous role can, so it's just being
consistent to express that in user.getRoles(). IMHO.
Well yours is the only userfolder implementation that does.
While I agree in the
Chris Withers wrote:
Florent Guillaume wrote:
When doing user.getRoles(). Because as Tres said more clearly than me,
every user can do what the Anonymous role can, so it's just being
consistent to express that in user.getRoles(). IMHO.
Well yours is the only userfolder implementation that does.
Florent Guillaume wrote:
OTOH Anonymous and Authenticated really shouldn't be roles but groups,
and indeed in CPS we have special groups representing Anonymous and
Authenticated. That makes things *much* more orthogonal, and local roles
(local group roles actually) can be used with them to
Chris Withers wrote at 2005-4-4 14:14 +0100:
Florent Guillaume wrote:
OTOH Anonymous and Authenticated really shouldn't be roles but groups,
and indeed in CPS we have special groups representing Anonymous and
Authenticated. That makes things *much* more orthogonal, and local roles
(local
Florent Guillaume wrote:
from AccessControl import getSecurityManager
user = getSecurityManager().getUser()
print user.getRoles()
return printed
returns ('Manager', 'Authenticated') when logged in as a manager
This queries the user object, and returns all roles the implementation
decided to
Chris Withers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(FWIW in CPSUserFolder we chose to return Authenticated as well as
Anonymous to be consistent.)
In what context? Providing both Authenticated and Anonymous on the same
user at the same time seems bizarre ;-)
When doing user.getRoles(). Because as
Chris Withers wrote at 2005-3-31 12:26 +0100:
Dieter Maurer wrote:
Any user has the Anonymous role whether or not it is authenticated.
Really?
...
print user.getRoles()
...
returns ('Manager', 'Authenticated') when logged in as a manager and
('Anonymous',) when anonymous?
A user will never
robert wrote at 2005-3-31 07:22 +0200:
Is my assumption that granting a permission to Anonymous means granting
it to anybody correct?
Correct.
--
Dieter
___
Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope
** No cross
Dieter Maurer wrote:
robert wrote at 2005-3-31 07:22 +0200:
Is my assumption that granting a permission to Anonymous means granting
it to anybody correct?
Correct.
Actually, I don't think that is strictly true! And it reminds me of a
period of confusion I went through a few months ago, when I
Cliff Ford wrote:
Dieter Maurer wrote:
robert wrote at 2005-3-31 07:22 +0200:
Is my assumption that granting a permission to Anonymous means
granting it to anybody correct?
Correct.
Actually, I don't think that is strictly true! And it reminds me of a
period of confusion I went through a few
Dieter Maurer wrote:
A user will have the Anonymous role iff they have not supplied any
authentication credentials.
Any user has the Anonymous role whether or not it is authenticated.
Really?
Then how come the following script:
from AccessControl import getSecurityManager
user =
Chris Withers wrote at 2005-3-30 08:31 +0100:
Dennis Allison wrote:
Are the standard roles (anonymous, authorized_user, manager) inclusive?
Yes. These special roles are inclusive (as their name might suggest).
...
A user will have the Anonymous role iff they have not supplied any
Dieter,
thanks for your clarifications.
Is my assumption that granting a permission to Anonymous means granting
it to anybody correct?
Robert
Dieter Maurer wrote:
Chris Withers wrote at 2005-3-30 08:31 +0100:
Dennis Allison wrote:
Are the standard roles (anonymous, authorized_user,
13 matches
Mail list logo
