jackrabbit-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Tobias Bocanegra (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] Commented: (JCR-1743) Session.checkPermission: add_node and set_property evaluation are not handled differently
Date Mon, 29 Sep 2008 11:46:44 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-1743?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12635360#action_12635360
] 

Tobias Bocanegra commented on JCR-1743:
---------------------------------------

how about extending the access manager in a way that set_property and add_node are handled
differently?
the accessmanager can still decide, if it wants to use the old or the new behavior.

> Session.checkPermission: add_node and set_property evaluation are not handled differently
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: JCR-1743
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-1743
>             Project: Jackrabbit
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: jackrabbit-core, security
>    Affects Versions: core 1.4.5
>            Reporter: Tobias Bocanegra
>            Assignee: Jukka Zitting
>         Attachments: JCR-1743-alternative.patch, JCR-1743.patch
>
>
> if the property does not exist yet, Session.checkPermission invokes an AccessManager.checkPermission(...
WRITE) for both cases. i.e. the access manager has no means for handle a "add_node" differently
from a "set_property" 
> suggest to create a fake property id for the case where the property does not exist.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


Mime
View raw message