[security-dev] Authorization constructs in PicketLink3

[Anil Saldhana]

I am supportive of your ideas, Pedro.

Unlike authentication, we need to remember that authorization is pretty 
domain specific. There is no magic bullet for rules/permissions. 
Ideally, as discussed before we should provide the opportunity to plug 
in custom authorization schemes.

On 05/07/2013 03:12 PM, Pedro Igor Silva wrote:
> As I have replied before, maybe the same arguments used to put the DIGEST/BASIC authc filter into picketlink-api are also valid for the this filter.
>
> We also need to think how the configuration would be, because we need to provide to the filter the URI patterns vs Roles mapping.
>
> As @pmuir said, the web.xml init-params should be avoided. As an alternative, we can:
>
>      - Provide a class like javax.ws.rs.core.Application where users can override some methods to provide additional security config (we can use that not only for authorization)
>      - Use a @Producer method to return a specific instance with the authz configuration.
>      - Use a @Qualifier (or only some interface) in order to be able to inject a specific bean that implements an interface with some methods that can be used to obtain the configuration.
>
> Makes sense ?
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Anil Saldhana" <Anil.Saldhana at redhat.com>
> To: security-dev at lists.jboss.org
> Sent: Tuesday, May 7, 2013 4:40:50 PM
> Subject: Re: [security-dev] Authorization constructs in PicketLink3
>
> Any objections to adding the access control filters to the core module?
>
> On 05/02/2013 11:38 AM, Anil Saldhana wrote:
>
>
>
> That is fine.  Timo should be secured with PicketLink Core alone. Right
> now, authz classes are the missing bits.
>
> On 05/02/2013 10:56 AM, Pedro Igor Silva wrote:
>
>
>
>> I remember Shane saying that he is going to take a look at the permissions api, mainly after the latest changes to the idm/core apis. > > I can start looking at that too, if necessary. Maybe providing some test cases to see the gaps (also provide some tests for the authentication stuff). > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Anil Saldhana" <Anil.Saldhana at redhat.com> > To: security-dev at lists.jboss.org > Sent: Thursday, May 2, 2013 12:31:26 PM > Subject: Re: [security-dev] Authorization constructs in PicketLink3 > > Right Pete - I do mention in the thread. I was referring to users > wanting alternative authorization mechanisms such as > that driven by Drools (as in Seam2) and maybe XACML. :) Ideally, the > default authz mechanism by the rbac filter > should be the permissions module. > > On 05/02/2013 10:24 AM, Pete Muir wrote:
>
>
>>> Isn't this what the permissions module is for (API/SPI for authorisation)? I know it's not finished, but I think we have time to do that for 3.0… >> >> We then add things like the RBAC filter delegating to it. >> >> On 2 May 2013, at 16:21, Anil Saldhana <Anil.Saldhana at redhat.com> wrote: >>
>
>
>>>> That is what I meant by pluggable. But we need to be aware of >>> dependencies getting pulled into core. We >>> do not want a dependency on drools, for example, to use core. If users >>> want some particular authz stuff, >>> they should be able to pull in those dependencies. >>> >>> I do not know yet how to get that done. ;) >>> >>> On 05/02/2013 09:54 AM, Pedro Igor Silva wrote:
>
>
>>>>> Maybe something we started with PicketBox, using Drools for rule-based authz, pluggable authz managers, etc. >>>> >>>> JBoss Seam 2 also supports Drools for authorization .... >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> From: "Anil Saldhana" <Anil.Saldhana at redhat.com> >>>> To: security-dev at lists.jboss.org >>>> Sent: Thursday, May 2, 2013 11:38:40 AM >>>> Subject: Re: [security-dev] Authorization constructs in PicketLink3 >>>> >>>> We have to remember the permission model work using IDM. >>>> >>>> I wonder if this filter can use pluggable authorization mechanisms, then >>>> maybe the perfect start. >>>> >>>> On 05/02/2013 09:36 AM, Pedro Igor Silva wrote:
>
>
>>>>>> I was looking at the org.picketlink.authentication.web.AuthenticationFilter. This class resides on core-api and we did it given some input from AG for DIGEST and BASIC authentication. >>>>> >>>>> Wondering if the authz filter we did for TIMO does not fit in the same case. >>>>> >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>> From: "Anil Saldhana" <Anil.Saldhana at redhat.com> >>>>> To: security-dev at lists.jboss.org >>>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 11:42:25 AM >>>>> Subject: [security-dev] Authorization constructs in PicketLink3 >>>>> >>>>> Shane/Pedro - we should start discussing the constructs for >>>>> authorization in PL3.  We have a few options on the table. We need to >>>>> figure out what we need such that for PL3 users, we have some options. >>>>> Lets use this thread to figure out the various options/strategies. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>