On 2/21/06, Jay L. firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
- It looks like you can grant a whole action permission at the top of the
class, not just wrapped in a block, right? As in
permit “registered”, :except => public
Yes. A class method “permit” inserts authorization checks via the
before_filter, and I pass along the :only and :except hashes. In real
this makes for succinct class-level authorization. A few of my
are restricted to registered members, which only requires: permit
I assume multiple permit statements would be additive - if one of them
grants you access, you have access?
They are processed in order and use redirection by default, unless you
the permit? form. The idea was to use it like scope: to execute a method
have to satisfy the class-level authorization as well as any preceding
method-level permits. Unfortunately, I haven’t been able to work out
short-circuiting with the redirection. That’s why the block form of
i.e., permit “foo” do…end) is used frequently in my code.
It might be nice to declare that
they’re processed in order, and to create an equivalent “deny” statement.
Otherwise, there are things you can’t do. F’rinstance, I want to take new
users (who have role User) through a registration screen, but not allow
them back once they’ve been granted the Registered role. Since the User
and Registered roles are additive in UserEngine, I have to create a
temporary Registering role, instead of
deny “registered”, :only => :reg_action
permit “user”, :only => :reg_action
I think this is what you want:
permit “user and not registered” do
If you use that in #reg_action, it will redirect unless whatever
model you are using has role “user” and is not “registered.”
- Thinking along those lines, :action might better than :only, since
isn’t actually exclusive.
The :only, :except syntax is used for compatability with before_filter
- As someone who hasn’t done Ruby outside Rails - and who’s watched as
Rails’ reliance on instance variables has decreased since 0.8 - I find it
confusing that “:meeting” can refer to substition by an options hash (a la
printf("%s")) or a previously-defined instance variable.
I thought about it, and I’m amenable to changes that make things less
confusing. The symbol-like nomenclature for the model is consistent with
ActiveRecord associations, e.g., belongs_to :meeting.
Thanks for the comments.