incubator-esme-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Xuefeng Wu <ben...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Deleting user from access pool
Date Thu, 01 Oct 2009 11:43:58 GMT
So we only need to add a new attribute validate at Privilege and modify
Privilege.hasPermission.

  def hasPermission(userId: Long, poolId: Long, permission:
Permission.Value) = Privilege.find(
    By(user, userId),
    By(pool, poolId),
    *By(validate, true)*
  ).map(_.permission.is >= permission).getOrElse(false)

It's done at server-side?

On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 7:30 PM, Richard Hirsch <hirsch.dick@gmail.com>wrote:

> Yes. That is easier. We don't have to worry about existing messages in
> the message queues and we just have to prevent future messages from
> the now probited pool from going to the user.
>
> On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 1:25 PM, Xuefeng Wu <benewu@gmail.com> wrote:
> > It well be easy ?
> > If we do not whether user read or unread, just leave the message in
> his/her
> > mailbox and could read whenever.
> >
> > And we never sent message to a user who leave the pool?
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 6:54 PM, Richard Hirsch <hirsch.dick@gmail.com
> >wrote:
> >
> >> The team leader would have no idea whether the user had read the
> >> message or not. The assumption is that the user has read it. The user
> >> was also part of the pool when the message was created - thus, at this
> >> particular point in time, he actually did have the right to view the
> >> message.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 12:39 PM, Xuefeng Wu <benewu@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > mail and IM is private but pool is public or group own.
> >> > If a team leader create a pool and does he want that some people who
> >> leave
> >> > team could red old message?
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 3:58 PM, Vassil Dichev <vdichev@apache.org>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> There are counterexamples- when you send out an email, it's in the
> >> >> inbox of the people you have sent it to and you cannot delete it.
> When
> >> >> you send a message in an instant messaging client, you cannot get it
> >> >> back. In the context of JIRA, the item can still change after
> >> >> permission is denied to you, while the message cannot be reedited in
> >> >> ESME.
> >> >>
> >> >> I'm with Dick here. The performance problem is that the stream of
> >> >> messages is updated in near real-time and any deleted messages will
> >> >> cause a cascade of changes across the inboxes of all users who have
> >> >> linked this message.
> >> >>
> >> >> I think we discussed deleting messages before, not in the context of
> >> >> this pool, and David strongly favored the opinion that messages
> should
> >> >> be immutable- once they're sent, that's it. Deleting messages also
> >> >> poses security/consistency issues with possible federation scenarios,
> >> >> which David intended to implement.
> >> >>
> >> >> There are many many other inconsistency issues which could arise if
> we
> >> >> start deleting messages. Take for example, resending. If a resent
> >> >> message is deleted, do you delete it from the inboxes of all your
> >> >> followers? And if it's a popular resent message, do you delete it
> from
> >> >> the stats actor? Do you reevaluate all the statistics for resent
> >> >> messages then? What if the message contains tags, do you reevaluate
> >> >> the tag cloud? What if it contains links, which are in the popular
> >> >> links stats? What if the message is part of a conversation, do you
> >> >> delete the whole conversation?
> >> >>
> >> >> So in the end, the immutability of messages and timelines is already
> >> >> deeply ingrained in the ESME architecture and is not subject to
> >> >> change- even if we decide that it's wise to do so, which I think it's
> >> >> not. It's far from a trivial change.
> >> >>
> >> >> Vassil
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 10:37 AM, Xuefeng Wu <benewu@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> >> > If user could not see any message from a pool which he/she leave,
> even
> >> >> > his/her message, What will happen?
> >> >> > In a company, If some one leave a team/project/department, he/she
> may
> >> be
> >> >> > could not read any document even he/she write.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > The messages are also some resource for a team/project/department,
> I
> >> >> think
> >> >> > it's fine that do not allow users can not read any messages in
the
> >> pool.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Think about jira, if you create a issue(task, defects) and the
> >> permission
> >> >> > said only team members.
> >> >> > And if you leave the team, you can not read the issue anymore.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 12:51 PM, Richard Hirsch <
> >> hirsch.dick@gmail.com
> >> >> >wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> Regarding the first part (deleting users from a pool) - here
are
> my
> >> >> ideas
> >> >> >> * We have no idea whether he has viewed the messages or not.
> >> >> >> * Of course, he should be able to continue see his own messages
> even
> >> >> >> if they were sent to a pool to which he no longer belongs.
> >> >> >> * The user's messages remain in the pool whether or not the
user
> is
> >> in
> >> >> the
> >> >> >> pool.
> >> >> >> * Since the user can no longer view the pool, he can only
view his
> >> own
> >> >> >> messages but not those of other users.
> >> >> >> * Question: Should we delete all old messages from the pool
to
> which
> >> >> >> the user was a member or should we just prevent new messages
from
> the
> >> >> >> now-forbidden pool going to the user. I prefer the second
choice.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Thoughts?
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> To the second point regarding the deletion of pools. I think
this
> >> >> >> needs more thought. We can't / shouldn't delete messages from
> closed
> >> >> >> pools. This would be a performance and programming nightmare.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> D.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 5:23 AM, Xuefeng Wu <benewu@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> >> >> > There're two features:1. delete users from pool;
> >> >> >> > 2. delete pool.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > There're some argue and my opinion:
> >> >> >> > *when delete users from pool.*
> >> >> >> > We could withdraw all messages from the user, whatever
read or
> >> unread.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > *when delete pool. ESME-68*
> >> >> >> > withdraw all messages
> >> >> >> > can create new pool which have the same name as deleted
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 3:59 PM, Vassil Dichev <
> vdichev@apache.org
> >> >
> >> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > Should we allow for a user to be deleted from
an access pool?
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > If yes what happens? Does he no longer have
access to the
> >> messages
> >> >> in
> >> >> >> >> > the pool - irregardless of whether he wrote
them or not?
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> It should be possible to delete a user, yes. I think
it has
> been
> >> >> >> >> discussed or specified in the requirements pdf that
once a
> message
> >> is
> >> >> >> >> in the user's mailbox, it stays there, so that's
how it works
> now.
> >> At
> >> >> >> >> any rate, deleting a message from the mailbox, which
the user
> may
> >> >> have
> >> >> >> >> already seen doesn't offer any more security. A user
also
> doesn't
> >> see
> >> >> >> >> messages in his/her mailbox, which were sent before
he was
> added
> >> to
> >> >> >> >> the pool.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> The interesting part is what happens if a pool has
been removed
> >> and
> >> >> >> >> whether it should be possible at all. This could
pose a
> security
> >> >> >> >> problem if an impostor creates a pool with the same
name
> (similar
> >> to
> >> >> >> >> what might happen with a deleted user account)
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > --
> >> >> >> > Global R&D Center,Shanghai China,Carestream Health,
Inc.
> >> >> >> > Tel:(86-21)3852 6101
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > --
> >> >> > Global R&D Center,Shanghai China,Carestream Health, Inc.
> >> >> > Tel:(86-21)3852 6101
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Global R&D Center,Shanghai China,Carestream Health, Inc.
> >> > Tel:(86-21)3852 6101
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Global R&D Center,Shanghai China,Carestream Health, Inc.
> > Tel:(86-21)3852 6101
> >
>



-- 
Global R&D Center,Shanghai China,Carestream Health, Inc.
Tel:(86-21)3852 6101

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message