Re: [Exist-development] [HEADS-UP] Merge in of Security Branch

[Adam R. <ad...@ex...>]

>> I don't think changing the security concerns here is a good idea. Rather I think the issue lies elsewhere, let me think about this...
>
> Right, I see your point.  You're saying that the issue here could be seen as:
>
> Giving guest users access to eXide is unwise.  This issue isn't
> specific to eXide; it applies equally to letting users execute any
> code which could run doc() or util:binary-doc() on a w+r resource.

Yes and Yes :-)

> You're saying that we need to start realizing that permissions now
> dictate whether the the *system* can read/write/execute resources on a
> given user's behalf, not whether the *user* can read/write/execute
> resources.  The system is now an explicit intermediary between the
> user and resources.  The system is the user's agent in
> reading/writing/executing resources.
>
> Is this a correct way of articulating the new permissions framework?

Kind of, but maybe too strict.

I think my concern is this - your use case if I understand, is that
you want to keep secure information in XQuery files e.g. usernames and
passwords. I dont understand why you would do that, perhaps you can
explain what you are trying to do in general terms, I think there may
be other solutions than the approach that you took maybe.

> Joe



-- 
Adam Retter

eXist Developer
{ United Kingdom }
ad...@ex...
irc://irc.freenode.net/existdb