Yes, because I think the most common permission will be 100% role based.
On 4/1/17 10:21 AM, Pedro Igor Silva wrote:
I think you are exploring now a new way of seeing things.
Today we have a flexible permissioning model where you define
independent policies to build these permissions or even build other
policies. Where you may have a library of policies, reuse these
policies across different permissions, etc.
What you are proposing, if I understood correctly, and that is what I
meant by the "new way of seeing things", is also allow users to create
permissions more easily without necessarily having to create policies.
In other words, we would be providing additional permission types (in
addition to resource/scope) for some very common use cases like the
one you mentioned where you just need a white/blacklist of roles.
Does it make sense ?
On Sat, Apr 1, 2017 at 10:11 AM, Bill Burke <bburke(a)redhat.com
<mailto:bburke@redhat.com>> wrote:
I find creating role policies as cumbersome. Also, how is the admin
supposed to know if a policy with a specific role has already been
created or not? Maybe policies can have DENY and PERMIT role lists.
when creating permissions you can just pick roles to add/remove to the
permission. I think the most used, most common case (90% of the
time?)
will be assigning role permissions to resources so we should make
it as
easy as possible. Both within the admin UI and APIs. Thoughts?
Bill
_______________________________________________
keycloak-dev mailing list
keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:keycloak-dev@lists.jboss.org>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev
<
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev>