Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Redesign user security system #415

Open
GenPage opened this issue Jul 20, 2015 · 4 comments
Open

Redesign user security system #415

GenPage opened this issue Jul 20, 2015 · 4 comments

Comments

@GenPage
Copy link
Contributor

GenPage commented Jul 20, 2015

This needs to be revisited and throughly re-designed. The current system is lacking in terms of access control and allowing actions to be performed on modpacks and mods that directly effect each other.

@GenPage GenPage self-assigned this Jul 20, 2015
@GenPage GenPage added this to the 0.7.4 milestone Jul 20, 2015
@GenPage GenPage modified the milestones: 0.8, 0.7.4 Oct 12, 2015
@heddendorp
Copy link
Contributor

Before digging yourself into that, I suggest to look at the newes version of laravel, which has great n features concerning this https://laravel.com/docs/5.2/authorization

@Indemnity83
Copy link
Contributor

@GenPage Is there interest in multi-tenancy of the application; or would this still be a single-tenant application, just with improved access control for multiple users.

lacking in terms of .. allowing actions to be performed on modpacks and mods that directly effect each other

This part sounds more like database integrity checks than security? Maybe you can expand on this a little.

Just trying to capture this as it relates to #617

@GenPage
Copy link
Contributor Author

GenPage commented Nov 30, 2016

@Indemnity83 Initially this was thought of to still be a single-tenant application with rewritten access controls for multiple users.

What are your thoughts on multi-tenancy? Is there an advantage you could this architecture applying to Solder?

@Indemnity83
Copy link
Contributor

The only reason to do so would be if the Technic team wanted to host a version of it.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants