Daniel Tröder wrote:
I am in the process of implementing a role concept via ACLs and hope for
a hint so that I don't invent the wheel a second time.
Specifically, it is about identity management for schools. A user
(object) can have several roles in multiple schools. Permissions on
other LDAP objects can thus differ depending on the role(s) the user and
the object have in the same school(s).
For example, a user could have been assigned the following roles that
are scattered over several schools:
→ "Teacher" in school 1
→ "School admin" in school 2
→ "Parent" in school 3
→ both "Teacher" and "Staff" in school 4
ACLs should now be defined accordingly, e.g.
→ the role "teacher" at school X can reset the password for the role
"student" at school X
→ the role "teacher" at school X *cannot* reset the password for the
role "student" of school Y
→ the role "school administrator" at school X can reset the password for
the roles "student" and "teacher" at school X
So far I have not seen any way to map such a construct via groups or
sets without including a separate ACL for each group, which is a
Is there another way to map the role concept besides implementing an own
I think a dynacl module is your only choice. Most people miss the difference
between roles and groups - group membership applies all the time. Once you're
a member of a group, the privileges of that group are omnipresent.
Whereas, membership in a role grants you these privileges *only for as long as
you assert that role* and adopting a role is a temporary, bounded activity.
So you need, at the least, in an LDAP context, an exop that says "assume role
X" and the corresponding "drop role X". Without these two primitives, you
don't actually have roles or role-based access control. LDAP's spec for proxy
authorization might be sufficient for this purpose.
-- Howard Chu
CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com
Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/
Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/