Pierangelo Masarati wrote:
Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
> --On Saturday, January 20, 2007 4:09 PM +0100 Pierangelo Masarati
>> Or, we could define /configurable) dynamic group specific attrs that
>> implement the dynamic group's identity (groupManager?) and authorization
>> rules (groupAuthzFrom?; groupAuthzTo would make sense as well; it could
>> be used to check if a dynamic group is allowed to let a user assume the
>> privileged identity when accessing a certain datum, the "to" of
> I guess my issue here, is that I want the proxy ID to not be associated
> with the client's ID at all. I simply want a way to have the dynamic
> group to use the ACL's to decide whether or not the client has read or
> compare to the membership list, and if it does, then to use an internal
> identity that knows nothing about the client itself to do the compare or
> membership generation as necessary. So I guess the second solution
> would work best in that case?
Well, mine was basically a suggestion to make things more finely
tunable; of course, a safe default would be, for example, if no dynamic
group exploitation authorization were defined, to allow users to use the
dynlist and to deny anonymous. The latter could be enabled by setting
groupAuthzFrom to "*" (shortcut for "dn.regex:.*").
So, in the end you would have what you need, while the feature could be
restricted as needed.
Funny how we hashed out the same things as this draft
I wish we had better communication sometimes; I never saw any talk of this on
the ldapext mailing list nor any announcement of the draft being available.
-- Howard Chu
Chief Architect, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com
Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc
Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/