[rspec-users] [rails] An authorization question
cflipse at gmail.com
Sat Feb 28 17:26:34 EST 2009
On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 3:42 PM, Ben Mabey <ben at benmabey.com> wrote:
> Chris Flipse wrote:
>> I've actually been okay with it at the unit testing / rspec level -- I've
>> had it stubbed as you describe for a while.
>> The pain point came in as I was trying to setup data for Cucumber ...
>> Which, listening to my tests, tells me that the current structure is bad. I
>> was more curious to see how others are handling that sort of situation.
> If you are seeing state from one scenario bleed over to the next I would
> suggest something like this in your env.rb:
> After do
Yep got that. The tests are actually *working*, it's just that the setup
has gotten painful.
>> I want to get *away* from the global variable, I'm just not entirely sure
>> what the target should be. There doesn't seem to be a whole lot of talk
>> about actual implementation specifics around model level authorization.
> I generally have a current_user method defined of my controller to return
> the logged in user.
Same. Authentication was originally generated using acts_as_authenticated,
so the standard conventions at the controller level are in place.
> Assuming that your app is only using User.current in your controllers you
> could try to move towards something like that... If you have models
> accessing User.current then it truly is being used as a global. :/
It truly is being used as a global.
> The user will then have some permissions methods that may take other
> objects or symbols. The method will simply return a boolean telling if the
> user is authorized or not. That logic usually is based on the role(s) of
> that user or relationship with the passed in object. Having this logic in
> the user could be viewed as a responsibility issue- should the user really
> be responsible for telling if it is authorized for everything? In general I
> do this for most simple cases. Only when it starts to get complex do I move
> it out into a Manager-like object.
Yes! This is what I was trying (poorly) to get at.
Responsibility issues might be a large part of why it got factored this way
to begin with. The global is bad. Really bad, which is why I'm trying to
figure out something that works better. But I believe it was put in place
so that a model can be responsible for it's own authorization. Some of the
models are used and updated from several different controllers, so any
authorization logic external to the model would have had to be repeated in
several different locations.
The concern with that might be an over-enthusiastic embrace of DRY. However
some of the authorization stuff is Really Really Important, so embedding the
authorization logic in the model itself was seen as a way to ensure it's not
Half of my problem right now is that I'm not even sure what *layer* to put
model specific authentication! If it's in the controller layer, it's
repeated logic in every controller that touches the model in question. If
it's in the model, the logic is centralized, but now your model needs not
only to know about Users in general, it needs a specific user. You have
less chance of someone doing Something They Shouldn't due to a forgotten
check in a controller, but the test setup seems to suffer for it.
One way or the other, the global User.current is going away -- soon. It's
just a question of what to replace it with, and where.
// anything worth taking seriously is worth making fun of
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the rspec-users