W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rww@w3.org > November 2012

Re: [WAC] regexps in WebAccessControl

From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2012 18:12:53 +0000
Message-ID: <50A92525.4080005@webr3.org>
To: mike amundsen <mamund@yahoo.com>
CC: Ruben Verborgh <ruben.verborgh@ugent.be>, Read-Write-Web <public-rww@w3.org>
mike amundsen wrote:
> ok, can't let this go....
> <snip>
> This couples your access control to your URI structure.
> </snip>
> yes, it does.
> i *always* (as far back as i can remember) secure the interface (resources
> on the server) via the URL. in fact, i use:
> Access[true/false] = (URL + Protocol_Method + User_Identity)
> for first-line authorization.
> tell me why this is a problem.

Extending slightly what Ruben wrote - Nothing wrong with it, that's what 
WebACL is - the proposal is to look at the lexical representation of the 
URI and base access control on whether the URI regexp matches not, or 
perhaps further, to base access control rules on specific server side 
directory structures which are only known behind the interface.

If we consider the case of generic data storage, then WebACL rules may 
often be sent sent by the client, for the server to apply to the 
resource, in relation to resources they control - would we want clients 
to have to know about implementation details hidden by the interface, 
such as directory structures (or even if there are directories!).

To me, regexp matching seems like it may be fairly useful, but something 
- which I can't quite vocalise (other than uri opacity axiom), and 
focusing on uri structure - is worrying me a little about it.

This is an area you understand well Mike, so any input you have as to 
what the positives and negatives are would be greatly appreciated.



> On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 10:49 AM, Nathan <nathan@webr3.org> wrote:
>> Ruben Verborgh wrote:
>>>  It is often useful to be able to specify that all resources in a
>>>> collection ( a directory ) or a whole namespace (say all resources
>>>> under /user/jack/.*
>>> This couples your access control to your URI structure. Iím not sure you
>>> want to do that.
>> Agreed.
Received on Sunday, 18 November 2012 18:13:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:40:04 UTC