# Automatic 'verify :xhr =\> true' for methods ending with \_xhr **URL:** \ **Category:** Rails\ **Created:** [December 3, 2007, 8:42pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/automatic-verify-xhr-true-for-methods-ending-with-xhr/122010 "2007-12-03T20:42:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 9\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![gabru](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/g/c0e974/32.png) [@gabru](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/gabru)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2007, 8:42pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/automatic-verify-xhr-true-for-methods-ending-with-xhr/122010/1 "2007-12-03T20:42:28Z")
hey guys, i am writing a couple of actions which are only used with an xhr. I ‘protect’ them all against a direct access with the ‘verify’ method in the controller verify :only =\> …, :xhr =\> true it would be cool if the system would automatically recognize the xhr actions and protect them … i want to postfix methods with ‘\_xhr’ and those should be only accessible with an xhr. - good for readability - good for my DRY does anyone has a tip on how to implement this? i guess it should go into the ‘ApplicationController’ ---
**Author:** ![gabru](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/g/c0e974/32.png) [@gabru](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/gabru)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2007, 8:55pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/automatic-verify-xhr-true-for-methods-ending-with-xhr/122010/2 "2007-12-03T20:55:27Z")
A before\_filter is all you really need as that’s kinda what verify is anyway - a DSL for creating before\_filters. before\_filter :protect\_xhr\_methods def protect\_xhr\_methods redirect\_to :action=\>“index” unless self.action\_name.include?("\_xhr") && request.xhr? end (I did not test this, and there’s a better way to test for \_xhr in the action name, but I am really lazy right now 🙂 ) Is that something close? On Dec 3, 2007 1:42 PM, Michal G. \< ---
**Author:** ![gabru](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/g/c0e974/32.png) [@gabru](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/gabru)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2007, 9:20pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/automatic-verify-xhr-true-for-methods-ending-with-xhr/122010/3 "2007-12-03T21:20:19Z")
yeah that was exactly what i needed… thanks… the only problem i have now is that i have two before\_filters: before\_filter :protect\_xhr, check\_login and both can do a redirect … when protect\_xhr does one already and check\_login also wants to do one i get a double response error … whats the best solution for this? ---
**Author:** ![gabru](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/g/c0e974/32.png) [@gabru](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/gabru)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2007, 5:06am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/automatic-verify-xhr-true-for-methods-ending-with-xhr/122010/4 "2007-12-04T05:06:38Z")
In a filter, make sure to return false and not just to render / redirect. You should always return false in a filter if you want to halt the execution chain. i.e redirect\_to my\_url and false Michal G. wrote: > yeah that was exactly what i needed… thanks… > the only problem i have now is that i have two before\_filters: > before\_filter :protect\_xhr, check\_login > > and both can do a redirect … when protect\_xhr does one already and > check\_login also wants to do one i get a double response error … > > whats the best solution for this? ---
**Author:** ![gabru](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/g/c0e974/32.png) [@gabru](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/gabru)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2007, 11:34am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/automatic-verify-xhr-true-for-methods-ending-with-xhr/122010/5 "2007-12-04T11:34:13Z")
Brian H. wrote: > @Nathan: > > While this is _currently_ true, things have changed in Rails 2.0, and > that’s > where I’ve been working a lot lately. Thank you for reminding of this. > > In Rails 2.0 you’ll no longer need to worry about that, as redirecting > or > explicitly rendering will stop the filter execution. (Yay!) > > [http://dev.rubyonrails.org/changeset/7984](http://dev.rubyonrails.org/changeset/7984) hey thats great!! thanks for your participation ---
**Author:** ![gabru](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/g/c0e974/32.png) [@gabru](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/gabru)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2007, 6:06am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/automatic-verify-xhr-true-for-methods-ending-with-xhr/122010/6 "2007-12-04T06:06:56Z")
@Nathan: While this is _currently_ true, things have changed in Rails 2.0, and that’s where I’ve been working a lot lately. Thank you for reminding of this. In Rails 2.0 you’ll no longer need to worry about that, as redirecting or explicitly rendering will stop the filter execution. (Yay!) [http://dev.rubyonrails.org/changeset/7984](http://dev.rubyonrails.org/changeset/7984) ---
**Author:** ![gabru](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/g/c0e974/32.png) [@gabru](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/gabru)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2007, 10:41pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/automatic-verify-xhr-true-for-methods-ending-with-xhr/122010/7 "2007-12-04T22:41:46Z")
On Dec 3, 2007 11:06 PM, Brian H. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > While this is _currently_ true, things have changed in Rails 2.0, and that’s > where I’ve been working a lot lately. Thank you for reminding of this. > > In Rails 2.0 you’ll no longer need to worry about that, as redirecting or > explicitly rendering will stop the filter execution. (Yay!) > > [http://dev.rubyonrails.org/changeset/7984](http://dev.rubyonrails.org/changeset/7984) /me watches his Rails books depreciate even faster than last time – Greg D. [http://destiney.com/](http://destiney.com/) ---
**Author:** ![gabru](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/g/c0e974/32.png) [@gabru](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/gabru)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2007, 12:10pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/automatic-verify-xhr-true-for-methods-ending-with-xhr/122010/8 "2007-12-04T12:10:32Z")
Yea, I am aware that they changed that and I am really glad they did. I always thought that the whole “returning false” thing was counter intuitive. Everyone coming in expects a render or a redirect to stop the execution. I always felt that was the better solution. Glad the rails core finally agreed. Brian H. wrote: > @Nathan: > > While this is _currently_ true, things have changed in Rails 2.0, and > that’s > where I’ve been working a lot lately. Thank you for reminding of this. > > In Rails 2.0 you’ll no longer need to worry about that, as redirecting > or > explicitly rendering will stop the filter execution. (Yay!) > > [http://dev.rubyonrails.org/changeset/7984](http://dev.rubyonrails.org/changeset/7984) ---
**Author:** ![gabru](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/g/c0e974/32.png) [@gabru](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/gabru)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2007, 9:06pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/automatic-verify-xhr-true-for-methods-ending-with-xhr/122010/9 "2007-12-07T21:06:08Z")
Greg: Just be glad you aren’t trying to follow the Agile book NOW, when Rails 2.0is installed when you do a fresh installation 🙂 I feel really sorry for any newbies right now.