Re: [Phpslash-devel] Dumb auth question

[nathan r. h. <na...@ds...>]

On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Joe Stewart wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 01:19:28PM -0800, nathan r. hruby wrote:
> >
> > I think this is me being dyslexic.  IIRC, in phplib $auth->nobody was a
> > boolean shorthand to determine if the current $auth object is
> > authenticated as a user, or if we're operating as a default user and
> > looking through the auth.inc class seems to beack this up.  this may have
> > chnaged recently, at this point Joe, youd know better than I.
> >
>
> It is a boolean to set if nobody access is allowed.
>
> false or unset - login is required.
> true - public access is allowed.
>

Hurm.. I will go back and re-read auth class - somthing isn't jiving in my
head but that makes sense.

> > So the correct method for determinig the user is still to check
> > $auth->['uid'] == 'nobody'
>
> Well it would have worked before :)
>
> Now the uid of nobody is changed to that of the phpSlash nobody user.
> This is done to have a easy method to control the name and access of
> the public user.
>

Ah.. that does make sense.

> The way we're checking for login status in phpSlash is if they have
> the "user" permission.
>
> 	perm->have_perm("user")
>

Wondered why we were doing this.  Ok.

>
> > I though phplib did away with this a longtime
> > ago (maybe now we're supposed to check $auth->['username']?)
> >
>
> no.
>

You're so mean to me ;)

> If it helps -
>
> There are a couple of methods in Author.class that can get author info
> from the uid.
>
> getName, getRealName and getAuthor
>

Do we want to say that these are reccommended methods of getting this
data, and just ignore $auth? altogether or is it still preferred to just
get what you need from $auth->{name,dname,emailfoo}

> > Again, me being kinda stupid.
> >
>
> nope.  It's about three things happening right together.
>

Hey! You got permissions in my auth class!
Hey! You got auth in my permissions class!
Heeeey!

-n
-- 
------
nathan hruby
na...@ds...
------