Isis Security Addon Custom ApplicationUser

[Martin Balmaceda <ma...@gmail.com>]

Hola

I see there are two options to working with the security addon:

1. "Out of the box" = add maven dependency and change shiro.ini
2. Base your project on the security addon example application

I would like to know if there is a way to use my own ApplicationUser domain
object to extend the users while still using for option 1.

I would use option 2 but it seems the example application is using a
simplified or perhaps older version of wicket (I could be mistaken on this
though).

Please let me know if this does makes sense.

Regards
Martin

-- 
to do is to be. dobedobedo

Re: Isis Security Addon Custom ApplicationUser

[Martin Balmaceda <ma...@gmail.com>]

Thanks I agree, option 1 is much better.

As for my user case: I have a system that hosts a number or organizations
orthogonally. What I need to do is associate each user to exactly 1 org so
that he/she can only see and modify information belonging to that org.

After looking at the problem, I figure that the best way to do it would be
to use the security module and add an Organization property to
ApplicationUser. Unfortunately it seems I would have to fork the module and
add my custom Orgnization domain object to it.



On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 5:54 PM, Dan Haywood <da...@haywood-associates.co.uk>
wrote:

> On 19 November 2014 16:41, Jeroen van der Wal <je...@stromboli.it> wrote:
>
> > Just double-checked: the master branch of isis-module-security uses the
> > latest and greatest version of Isis, 1.8.0-SNAPSHOT
> >
> > [1]
> >
> >
> https://github.com/isisaddons/isis-module-security/blob/master/pom.xml#L32-L36
> >
> >
> (though the screenshots in the README are still of 1.7.0)
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 4:33 PM, Jeroen van der Wal <jeroen@stromboli.it
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Martin,
> > >
> > > I would advice against option 2 because you lose an easy update path to
> > > newer versions of the security module.
> > >
> >
>
> +1 to that advice.
>
>
>
>
> > > Tell us more about your use-case so we can see what the options are.
> > >
> >
>
> In particular, is the additional information you need to store mandatory
> with no sensible default (ie would need to prompt for it), or would the
> current signatures of the methods in ApplicationUsers domain service
> suffice?
>
>
>
>
>
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > >
> > > Jeroen
> > >
> > > On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 2:24 PM, Martin Balmaceda <
> > > martin.balmaceda@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> >
>



-- 
to do is to be. dobedobedo

Re: Isis Security Addon Custom ApplicationUser

[Dan Haywood <da...@haywood-associates.co.uk>]

On 19 November 2014 16:41, Jeroen van der Wal <je...@stromboli.it> wrote:

> Just double-checked: the master branch of isis-module-security uses the
> latest and greatest version of Isis, 1.8.0-SNAPSHOT
>
> [1]
>
> https://github.com/isisaddons/isis-module-security/blob/master/pom.xml#L32-L36
>
>
(though the screenshots in the README are still of 1.7.0)





> On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 4:33 PM, Jeroen van der Wal <je...@stromboli.it>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Martin,
> >
> > I would advice against option 2 because you lose an easy update path to
> > newer versions of the security module.
> >
>

+1 to that advice.




> > Tell us more about your use-case so we can see what the options are.
> >
>

In particular, is the additional information you need to store mandatory
with no sensible default (ie would need to prompt for it), or would the
current signatures of the methods in ApplicationUsers domain service
suffice?





> > Cheers,
> >
> >
> > Jeroen
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 2:24 PM, Martin Balmaceda <
> > martin.balmaceda@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
>

Re: Isis Security Addon Custom ApplicationUser

[Jeroen van der Wal <je...@stromboli.it>]

Just double-checked: the master branch of isis-module-security uses the
latest and greatest version of Isis, 1.8.0-SNAPSHOT

[1]
https://github.com/isisaddons/isis-module-security/blob/master/pom.xml#L32-L36

On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 4:33 PM, Jeroen van der Wal <je...@stromboli.it>
wrote:

> Hi Martin,
>
> I would advice against option 2 because you lose an easy update path to
> newer versions of the security module.
>
> Tell us more about your use-case so we can see what the options are.
>
> Cheers,
>
>
> Jeroen
>
> On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 2:24 PM, Martin Balmaceda <
> martin.balmaceda@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hola
>>
>> I see there are two options to working with the security addon:
>>
>> 1. "Out of the box" = add maven dependency and change shiro.ini
>> 2. Base your project on the security addon example application
>>
>> I would like to know if there is a way to use my own ApplicationUser
>> domain
>> object to extend the users while still using for option 1.
>>
>> I would use option 2 but it seems the example application is using a
>> simplified or perhaps older version of wicket (I could be mistaken on this
>> though).
>>
>> Please let me know if this does makes sense.
>>
>> Regards
>> Martin
>>
>> --
>> to do is to be. dobedobedo
>>
>
>

Re: Isis Security Addon Custom ApplicationUser

[Jeroen van der Wal <je...@stromboli.it>]

Hi Martin,

I would advice against option 2 because you lose an easy update path to
newer versions of the security module.

Tell us more about your use-case so we can see what the options are.

Cheers,


Jeroen

On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 2:24 PM, Martin Balmaceda <
martin.balmaceda@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hola
>
> I see there are two options to working with the security addon:
>
> 1. "Out of the box" = add maven dependency and change shiro.ini
> 2. Base your project on the security addon example application
>
> I would like to know if there is a way to use my own ApplicationUser domain
> object to extend the users while still using for option 1.
>
> I would use option 2 but it seems the example application is using a
> simplified or perhaps older version of wicket (I could be mistaken on this
> though).
>
> Please let me know if this does makes sense.
>
> Regards
> Martin
>
> --
> to do is to be. dobedobedo
>