Re: [Zope] Authentication, Anonymous and Public
Capesius, Alan writes:
I'm running into a problem after implementing jcNTUserFolder in a subfolder of my site. Users can access the root level or particular subfolders anonymously. Once a user accesses the protected NTUserFolder, the credentials are saved in the browser. If the user then returns to the anonymous area, they can no longer access th folder due to the browser credentials.
Does Zope have a mechanism equivalent to the Novell NDS Public access? that is to say:
Anonymous = not authenticated. Everyone = authenticated users (that are members of the group) Public = authenticated and anonymous users.
In Zope, each user has a set of roles. Any user has the "Anonymous" role. Log-in users may have additional roles. Thus, what you see, should not happen. Dieter
I thought the same. Perhaps the use of NT User causes this? Since the browser has the credentials to authenticate to NT and the higher folders are not aware of the NT User Folder... Seems the only solutions are to use the NT User Folder at the root level. Thanks
---------- From: Dieter Maurer[SMTP:DIETER@HANDSHAKE.DE] Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 4:40:26 PM To: Capesius, Alan Cc: zope@zope.org Subject: Re: [Zope] Authentication, Anonymous and Public Auto forwarded by a Rule
Capesius, Alan writes:
I'm running into a problem after implementing jcNTUserFolder in a subfolder of my site. Users can access the root level or particular subfolders anonymously. Once a user accesses the protected NTUserFolder, the credentials are saved in the browser. If the user then returns to the anonymous area, they can no longer access th folder due to the browser credentials.
Does Zope have a mechanism equivalent to the Novell NDS Public access? that is to say:
Anonymous = not authenticated. Everyone = authenticated users (that are members of the group) Public = authenticated and anonymous users.
In Zope, each user has a set of roles. Any user has the "Anonymous" role. Log-in users may have additional roles.
Thus, what you see, should not happen.
Dieter
Dieter Maurer wrote:
In Zope, each user has a set of roles. Any user has the "Anonymous" role. Log-in users may have additional roles.
I'm not convinced this is true... Quoting from the LoginManager CHANGES.TXT file:
Generic User Source, like the GenericUserFolder product it was inspired by, gave all users the Anonymous role. This seems to be incorrect according to what other user folders do, including the standard Zope version, so GUS now no longer does this.
...which is why Alan experiences this problem. I've also run into it just using a normal acl_users folder and I've been mentioning every few months since I bumped into it back in March. Here's my opriginal post: http://zope.nipltd.com/public/lists/dev-archive.nsf/ByKey/82AE22A20C7E88AE I wish this could get sorted out as it makes security a nightmare unless you use a web of local roles, which is painful and messy to maintain. Is there any reason why every user shouldn't have the anonymous role for every accessible page/object/thing visitable through a protocol? cheers, Chris
My suggestion for splitting the role or allowing an "anyone" or "public" role would allow "anonymous" to be maintained and used to identify users that are not authenticated. (This seems to be the norm now for DTML.) The new role would basically be defined as "ignore all security and allow access" Placing the alternate User Folder at the root and using hierarchical roles defined at the root level would make it more manageable, but it would have several drawbacks I can think of off hand: more complex management, shared security model in virtual servers, and difficult for newbies to implement security without locking themselves out of the entire system. Perhaps a flag for "use security"/"don't use security" on this folder/object would be useful? I haven't seen this submitted to the Bug Collector yet..
---------- From: Chris Withers[SMTP:CHRISW@NIPLTD.COM] Dieter Maurer wrote: In Zope, each user has a set of roles. Any user has the "Anonymous" role. Log-in users may have additional roles.
I'm not convinced this is true...
Quoting from the LoginManager CHANGES.TXT file:
Generic User Source, like the GenericUserFolder product it was inspired by, gave all users the Anonymous role. This seems to be incorrect according to what other user folders do, including the standard Zope version, so GUS now no longer does this.
...which is why Alan experiences this problem. I've also run into it just using a normal acl_users folder and I've been mentioning every few months since I bumped into it back in March. Here's my opriginal post:
http://zope.nipltd.com/public/lists/dev-archive.nsf/ByKey/82AE22A20C7E88AE
I wish this could get sorted out as it makes security a nightmare unless you use a web of local roles, which is painful and messy to maintain.
Is there any reason why every user shouldn't have the anonymous role for every accessible page/object/thing visitable through a protocol?
cheers,
Chris
Chris Withers writes:
Dieter Maurer wrote:
In Zope, each user has a set of roles. Any user has the "Anonymous" role. Log-in users may have additional roles.
I'm not convinced this is true... The Content Manager Guide (Security, Authorization) states it this way:
The "Anonymous" role, which all users have implicitly, .... This is natural, too. Why should a registered user have less authorization than an anonymous one. Thus, two reasons to change the Zope authorization, such that each user has implicitely the "Anonymous" role, if this is not the case now. Dieter
Dieter Maurer wrote:
In Zope, each user has a set of roles. Any user has the "Anonymous" role. Log-in users may have additional roles.
I'm not convinced this is true...
The Content Manager Guide (Security, Authorization) states it this way:
The "Anonymous" role, which all users have implicitly, ....
...and check out the last time the Content Manager's Guide was updated ;-) Seriously, though, I think this SHOULD be true, although I'm pretty sure it isn't.
This is natural, too. Why should a registered user have less authorization than an anonymous one.
Or, to put it another way, just because an acl_users folder doesn't know anything about a user, why should that user not have the anonymous role?
Thus, two reasons to change the Zope authorization, such that each user has implicitely the "Anonymous" role, if this is not the case now.
I totally agree :-) Chris
On Sun, 2 Jul 2000, Dieter Maurer wrote:
Chris Withers writes:
Dieter Maurer wrote:
In Zope, each user has a set of roles. Any user has the "Anonymous" role. Log-in users may have additional roles.
I'm not convinced this is true... The Content Manager Guide (Security, Authorization) states it this way:
The "Anonymous" role, which all users have implicitly, ....
Ahh... I thought I saw this somewhere. Either a bug in the documentation, or in BasicUserFolder. Either way it should go in the collector. Since few (if any) of the user folders use this, it may be best handled in the Zope source if it is decided that it isn't a documentation error. -- Stuart Bishop Work: zen@cs.rmit.edu.au Senior Systems Alchemist Play: zen@shangri-la.dropbear.id.au Computer Science, RMIT University
Stuart Bishop wrote:
or in BasicUserFolder. Either way it should go in the collector.
Issue 1391, or in a slightly different phrasing, Issue 467 cheers, Chris
On Fri, 30 Jun 2000, Dieter Maurer wrote:
Capesius, Alan writes:
I'm running into a problem after implementing jcNTUserFolder in a subfolder of my site. Users can access the root level or particular subfolders anonymously. Once a user accesses the protected NTUserFolder, the credentials are saved in the browser. If the user then returns to the anonymous area, they can no longer access th folder due to the browser credentials.
Does Zope have a mechanism equivalent to the Novell NDS Public access? that is to say:
Anonymous = not authenticated. Everyone = authenticated users (that are members of the group) Public = authenticated and anonymous users.
In Zope, each user has a set of roles. Any user has the "Anonymous" role. Log-in users may have additional roles.
Thus, what you see, should not happen.
Users, by default, are not granted the 'Anonymous' role. If you explicity grant the Anonymous role to your users you will get the behaviour you want. Earlier than current versions of GUF automatically did this, but I changed it in the later releases after I saw the error pointed our by Ty or Phillip - this may be a source of some confusion. This email live from drizzly Queensland :-( -- Stuart Bishop Work: zen@cs.rmit.edu.au Senior Systems Alchemist Play: zen@shangri-la.dropbear.id.au Computer Science, RMIT University
Stuart Bishop writes:
On Fri, 30 Jun 2000, Dieter Maurer wrote:
In Zope, each user has a set of roles. Any user has the "Anonymous" role. Log-in users may have additional roles.
Thus, what you see, should not happen.
Users, by default, are not granted the 'Anonymous' role. If you explicity grant the Anonymous role to your users you will get the behaviour you want. Let's discuss whether this is useful.
A user that does not log in, i.e. a user you know nothing of, gets the "Anonymous" role automatically (at least with "acl_users"). A logged in user may not get the "Anonymous" role. This does not provide additional security, because this user may simply shut down his browser and access the page again as anonymous user. On the other hand, it may result in surprises: suddenly (after a log on) I can no longer do things that I was able to do before the log on. I think, this should be changed. Dieter
Dieter Maurer wrote:
A user that does not log in, i.e. a user you know nothing of, gets the "Anonymous" role automatically (at least with "acl_users"). A logged in user may not get the "Anonymous" role.
This does not provide additional security, because this user may simply shut down his browser and access the page again as anonymous user. On the other hand, it may result in surprises: suddenly (after a log on) I can no longer do things that I was able to do before the log on.
I think, this should be changed.
I agree, and I've said so, many times before ;-) Chris
participants (4)
-
Alan Capesius, MCSE -
Chris Withers -
Dieter Maurer -
Stuart Bishop