Search Results

Search found 1424 results on 57 pages for 'roles'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 7/57 | < Previous Page | 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14  | Next Page >

  • Use multiple inheritance to discriminate useage roles?

    - by Arne
    Hi fellows, it's my flight simulation application again. I am leaving the mere prototyping phase now and start fleshing out the software design now. At least I try.. Each of the aircraft in the simulation have got a flight plan associated to them, the exact nature of which is of no interest for this question. Sufficient to say that the operator way edit the flight plan while the simulation is running. The aircraft model most of the time only needs to read-acess the flight plan object which at first thought calls for simply passing a const reference. But ocassionally the aircraft will need to call AdvanceActiveWayPoint() to indicate a way point has been reached. This will affect the Iterator returned by function ActiveWayPoint(). This implies that the aircraft model indeed needs a non-const reference which in turn would also expose functions like AppendWayPoint() to the aircraft model. I would like to avoid this because I would like to enforce the useage rule described above at compile time. Note that class WayPointIter is equivalent to a STL const iterator, that is the way point can not be mutated by the iterator. class FlightPlan { public: void AppendWayPoint(const WayPointIter& at, WayPoint new_wp); void ReplaceWayPoint(const WayPointIter& ar, WayPoint new_wp); void RemoveWayPoint(WayPointIter at); (...) WayPointIter First() const; WayPointIter Last() const; WayPointIter Active() const; void AdvanceActiveWayPoint() const; (...) }; My idea to overcome the issue is this: define an abstract interface class for each usage role and inherit FlightPlan from both. Each user then only gets passed a reference of the appropriate useage role. class IFlightPlanActiveWayPoint { public: WayPointIter Active() const =0; void AdvanceActiveWayPoint() const =0; }; class IFlightPlanEditable { public: void AppendWayPoint(const WayPointIter& at, WayPoint new_wp); void ReplaceWayPoint(const WayPointIter& ar, WayPoint new_wp); void RemoveWayPoint(WayPointIter at); (...) }; Thus the declaration of FlightPlan would only need to be changed to: class FlightPlan : public IFlightPlanActiveWayPoint, IFlightPlanEditable { (...) }; What do you think? Are there any cavecats I might be missing? Is this design clear or should I come up with somethink different for the sake of clarity? Alternatively I could also define a special ActiveWayPoint class which would contain the function AdvanceActiveWayPoint() but feel that this might be unnecessary. Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • Rails - inheritance hierarchy of classes where an subtipe can play two roles

    - by Miquel
    I need to model Owners and Rentees in an application, so you have stuff that is always owned by someone and can be rented for someone else. I first approached this problem with Single Table Inheritance because both types of person will share all attributes, so you would have a model called Person associated to a table people with Owner and Rentee inheriting from Person. The problem is that Single type inheritance discerns subtypes using a field type and therefore a record in the table can represent either an Owner or a Rentee but not both at the same time, while in the real context you can have an Owner which is renting something from another Owner and therefore that person is at the same time an Owner and a Rentee. How would you approach this problem? Would you use separated tables fro owners and rentees? Is there any other type of table inheritance in Rails?

    Read the article

  • Rails - inheritance hierarchy of classes where a subtype can play two roles

    - by Miquel
    I need to model Owners and Rentees in an application, so you have stuff that is always owned by someone and can be rented for someone else. I first approached this problem with Single Table Inheritance because both types of person will share all attributes, so you would have a model called Person associated to a table people with Owner and Rentee inheriting from Person. The problem is that Single type inheritance discerns subtypes using a field type and therefore a record in the table can represent either an Owner or a Rentee but not both at the same time, while in the real context you can have an Owner which is renting something from another Owner and therefore that person is at the same time an Owner and a Rentee. How would you approach this problem? Would you use separated tables for owners and rentees? Is there any other type of table inheritance in Rails?

    Read the article

  • Expanded securityadmin

    - by user80652
    I'm aware that sysadmin is documented as the server role necessary for creating logins (SQL/Windows-integrated); nevertheless, I'm tasked to find out if there's any other server role (built-in or otherwise) that can be used. To be specific, I'm looking to setup one or two logins with access to create logins, create [database] users, assign users to [database] roles. Potentially reset passwords, but most of the logins are Windows-integrated and it's not necessary. Cannot have access to data at all, nor can these logins have rights to update tables nor create/update roles. Seems my only options so far are to set these 2 logins with securityadmin server role and for the specific databases, configure with db_securityadmin and db_accessadmin... but this configuration doesn't allow for creating logins.

    Read the article

  • La préversion de Visual Guard 5 disponible sur demande, l'outil de sécurisation et de gestion des rôles sortira officiellement le 30 juin

    La préversion de Visual Guard 5 disponible sur demande L'outil de sécurisation et de gestion des rôles sortira le 30 juin C'est officiel, Visual Guard 5 sortira le 30 juin 2012. Pour son éditeur, Novalys, il s'agit d'une version majeure qui doit « améliorer la facilité d'implémentation de l'outil dans des environnements hétérogènes ». Pour mémoire, Visual Guard (VG) est une solution modulaire flexible, « tout en un » (sic) qui propose de combiner authentification et permissions des utilisateurs (console d'administration centralisée, gestion des permissions et des rôles utilisateurs sans écrire de code, console web pour auditer les applis, etc.) La version 5 p...

    Read the article

  • rails delete_all exception

    - by Sergei
    Hello, guys! I have some User model, Role model and Assignment model to manage role-based user system. Just like here . So, here some kind of code, to include roles into users form: <% for role in Role.all %> <%= check_box_tag "user[role_ids][]", role.id, @user.roles.include?(role) %> <%=h role.name %><br /> <% end %> And all's working fine for new records and for editing records. But I just want to make possible to restrict deleting Assigment with id=1, cause this Assignment for default root user from migration, who must be admin anyway. Otherwise, I can lose my last admin. So I've tryed to add before_destroy to Assignment.rb model, but it doesn't work. I've noticed, that when I'm editing user and trying to remove his admin role(assignment), the server makes a delete_all method, not destroy method. So, does anybody know how to catch the deleting of Assignment with id=1 through this kind of code? Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • How can I limit asp.net control actions based on user role?

    - by Duke
    I have several pages or views in my application which are essentially the same for both authenticated users and anonymous users. I'd like to limit the insert/update/delete actions in formviews and gridviews to authenticated users only, and allow read access for both authed and anon users. I'm using the asp.net configuration system for handling authentication and roles. This system limits access based on path so I've been creating duplicate pages for authed and anon paths. The solution that comes to mind immediately is to check roles in the appropriate event handlers, limiting what possible actions are displayed (insert/update/delete buttons) and also limiting what actions are performed (for users that may know how to perform an action in the absence of a button.) However, this solution doesn't eliminate duplication - I'd be duplicating security code on a series of pages rather than duplicating pages and limiting access based on path; the latter would be significantly less complicated. I could always build some controls that offered role-based configuration, but I don't think I have time for that kind of commitment right now. Is there a relatively easy way to do this (do such controls exist?) or should I just stick to path-based access and duplicate pages? Does it even make sense to use two methods of authorization? There are still some pages which are strictly for either role so I'll be making use of path-based authorization anyway. Finally, would using something other than path-based authorization be contrary to typical asp.net design practices, at least in the context of using the asp.net configuration system?

    Read the article

  • inetmgr crashes after adding IIS6 MetabaseCompatibility Role

    - by Josef
    I added the IIS6 MetabaseCompatibility Role to my Server 2008 but can no longer launch inetmgr: IISMANAGER_CRASH IIS Manager terminated unexpectedly. Exception:System.NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object. at Microsoft.Web.Management.Host.Shell.ShellApplication.Initialize(Boolean localDevelopmentMode, Boolean resetPreferences) at Microsoft.Web.Management.Host.Shell.ShellApplication.Execute(Boolean localDevelopmentMode, Boolean resetPreferences, Boolean resetPreferencesNoLaunch) Process:InetMgr any ideas? In the meantime, I uninstalled that role but I still don't have an inetmgr (mmc snapin doesn't work either).

    Read the article

  • How to leverage the internal HTTP endpoint available on Azure web roles?

    - by adelsors
    Imagine you have a Web application using an in-memory collection that changes occasionally, loading it from storage on the Application_Start global.asax event and updating it whenever it changes. If you want to deploy this application on Azure you need to keep in mind that more than one instance of the application can be running at any time and therefore you need to provide some mechanism to keep all instances informed with the latest changes. Because that the communication through internal endpoints between Azure role instances is at no cost, a good solution can be maintaining the information on Azure Storage Tables, reading its contents on the Application_Start event and populating its changes to all instances using the internal HTTP port available on Azure Web Roles. You need to follow these steps to leverage the internal HTTP endpoint available on Azure web roles: 1.   Define an internal HTTP endpoint in the Web Role properties, for example InternalHttpEndpoint   2.   Add a new WCF service to the Web Role, for example NotificationServices.svc 3.   Add a method on the new service to receive notifications from other role instances. 4.   Declare a class that inherits from System.ServiceModel.Activation.ServiceHostFactory and override the method CreateServiceHost to host the internal endpoint.   Note that you can use SecurityMode.None because the internal endpoint is private to the instances of the service, this is provided by the platform. 5.   Edit the markup of the service right clicking the svc file and selecting "View markup" to add the new factory as the factory to be used to create the service    6. Now you can notify changes to other instances using this code:

    Read the article

  • How to use role-hierarchy in Spring Security 3 with Spring EL?

    - by Aleksey
    I want to use @PreAuthorize annotation on service methods with Spring Security. One of requirements is to use role-hierarchy. But by default it is not enabled. I found that in SecurityExpressionRoot class ("the base class for expression root objects") there is a property roleHierarchy. The class actually does use this property for methods like hasRole() and hasAnyRole(). I suppose that if I supply it with my own RoleHierarchy bean I will be able to use @PreAuthorize annotations with hierarchical roles. How can I inject my hierarchy bean into SecurityExpressionRoot?

    Read the article

  • MembershipProvider, IPrincipal, IIdentity?

    - by MRFerocius
    Hello guys; I have a conceptual question... I am making an Intranet application (Web platform) for a company. I have a SQL Server DB with these tables: Users (userID, userName, userPass, roleID) Roles (roleID, roleName) Pages (pageID, pageURL) RolesXPages(pageID, roleID) How is the best way to create a structure to store all this information while the user navigates the site, I mean, on the thread I should be able to check his role, his pages (the ones he can access) I have been reading and there is a lot of stuff there where Im confused, I saw the MembershipProvider, IPrincipal, IIdentity, etc classes but Im not sure what should be the best one for me. Any thoughts... Thanks in advance! Edit: Everytime gets more confusing... I just want to handle those structures at runtime and be able to mantain state during page callbacks or changing pages...

    Read the article

  • Overriding SQLMembershipProvider in C#

    - by vikp
    Hi, Is there built in methods into .net framework to do the following: Get role GUID from user name/user GUID Get role name from role GUID So far I have been sending queries to the asp_roles and asp_users tables to obtain that information and I'm wondering if there is a nicer way of doing this? I have the following methods that I store in the ASPUtilities class: getRoleGUID(guid userGuid) { LINQ joins } getRoleGuid(string userName) { LINQ joins } getRoleName(guid roleGuid) { LINQ joins } Thank you EDIT: I have just looked into extending SQLMembershipProvider examples. Few examples completely override the SQLMembershipProvider, but I think what I'm interested is just adding few extra methods to deal with the roles by using LINQ. Is this feasible?

    Read the article

  • Rails Authentication

    - by Oluf Nielsen
    Hey, i need some help with rails, again! Last it was about Authlogic.. Well I'm gone a bit backward since.. I mean, Authlogic isn't a Authentcate system i like.. So now i wan't you guys to tell me what you think is the best! I going to use it to a project of mine. Where there has to be a few roles like Admin, User and Guest.. So might you guys can tell me what is good and what is bad..?

    Read the article

  • Overriding SQLMembershipProvider

    - by vikp
    Is there built in methods into .net framework to do the following: Get role GUID from user name/user GUID Get role name from role GUID So far I have been sending queries to the asp_roles and asp_users tables to obtain that information and I'm wondering if there is a nicer way of doing this? I have the following methods that I store in the ASPUtilities class: getRoleGUID(guid userGuid) { LINQ joins } getRoleGuid(string userName) { LINQ joins } getRoleName(guid roleGuid) { LINQ joins } EDIT: I have just looked into extending SQLMembershipProvider examples. Few examples completely override the SQLMembershipProvider, but I think what I'm interested is just adding few extra methods to deal with the roles by using LINQ. Is this feasible?

    Read the article

  • Custom fine-grained claims based authorization system in ASP.NET MVC - wheres and hows

    - by BuzzBubba
    So, I'd like to implement my own custom authorization system in MVC2. If I'd have to create a global class, where do I instantiate it? Can HttpContext be extended with my own additions and where do I do that? Should I use Authorization filters for rights validation or ActionFilters or do it within an action? Can ActionFilter pass any data to the action itself? Previously (in WebForms) I was using a Session object where I would put a serialized object containing essential user data (account id and a list of roles and rights) and I'd extend my own Page class.

    Read the article

  • Wordpress: Create a customized role / user

    - by Mestika
    Hi, I’m farely new to Wordpress but are working on putting a page together which has a very simple purpose. I’m creating it for a customer with little or none IT experience so I want to create a user he can use to login and edit his pages – and nothing more. No settings, no comments, no posts, no links, no nothing, just create, delete and edit pages and maybe edit his own profile or at least his E-mail and password. I can see that wordpress has some predefined roles for users but none of them completely does what I want and they either has to little or to many rights. I’ve been looking at the wordpress page http://codex.wordpress.org/Roles_and_Capabilities but can’t seem to get a clear answer. Is it in any way possible for me to create my own user role (e.g. customer) where I can set the rights I want for him? Thanks Sincerely Mestika

    Read the article

  • Non-string role names in ASP.NET MVC?

    - by MikeWyatt
    ASP.NET MVC has good support for role-based security, but the usage of strings as role names is maddening, simply because they cannot be strongly-typed as enumerations. For example, I have an "Admin" role in my app. The "Admin" string will now exist in the Authorize attribute of my action, in my master page (for hiding a tab), in my database (for defining the roles available to each user), and any other place in my code or view files where I need to perform special logic for admin or non-admin users. Is there a better solution, short of writing my own authorization attribute and filter, that would perhaps deal with a collection of enumeration values?

    Read the article

  • Best approach to limit users to a single node of a given content type in Drupal

    - by Chaulky
    I need to limit users to a single node of a given content type. So a user can only create one node of TypeX. I've come up with two approaches. Which would be better to use... 1) Edit the node/add/typex menu item to check the database to see if the user has already created a node of TypeX, as well as if they have permissions to create it. 2) When a user creates a node of TypeX, assign them to a different role that doesn't have permissions to create that type of node. In approach 1, I have to make an additional database call on every page load to see if they should be able to see the "Create TypeX" (node/add/typex). But in approach 2, I have to maintain two separate roles. Which approach would you use?

    Read the article

  • Rails + simple role system through associative table

    - by user202411
    So I have the Ninja model which has many Hovercrafts through ninja_hovercrafts (which stores the ninja_id and the hovercraft_id). It is of my understanding that this kind of arrangement should be set in a way that the associative table stores only enough information to bind two different classes. But I'd like to use the associative table to work as a very streamlined authorization hub on my application. So i'd also like this table to inform my system if this binding makes the ninja the pilot or co-pilot of a given hovercraft, through a "role" field in the table. My questions are: Is this ugly? Is this normal? Are there methods built into rails that would help me to automagically create Ninjas and Hovercrafts associations WITH the role? For exemple, could I have a nested form to create both ninjas and hcs in a way that the role field in ninjas_hovercrafts would be also filled? If managing my application roles this way isn't a good idea, whats the non-resource heavy alternative (my app is being designed trying to avoid scalability problems such as excessive joins, includes, etc) thank you

    Read the article

  • How to leverage the internal HTTP endpoint available on Azure web roles?

    - by Alfredo Delsors
    Imagine you have a Web application using an in-memory collection that changes occasionally but is used very often. The collection gets loaded from storage on the Application_Start global.asax event and is updated whenever its content changes. If you want to deploy this application on Azure you need to keep in mind that more than one instance of the application can be running at any time and therefore you need to provide some mechanism to keep all instances informed with the latest changes. Because the communication through internal endpoints between Azure role instances is at no cost, a good solution can be maintaining the information on Azure Storage Tables, reading its contents on the Application_Start event and populating its changes to all other instances using the internal HTTP port available on Azure Web Roles. You need to follow these steps to leverage the internal HTTP endpoint available on Azure web roles to maintain all instances up to date. 1.   Define an internal HTTP endpoint in the Web Role properties, for example InternalHttpEndpoint   2.   Add a new WCF service to the Web Role, for example NotificationService.svc 3.   Disable multiple site bindings in web.config: <serviceHostingEnvironment multipleSiteBindingsEnabled="false"> 4.   Add a method on the new service to receive notifications from other role instances. namespace Service { [ServiceContract] public interface INotificationService { [OperationContract(IsOneWay = true)] void Notify(Information info); } } 5.   Declare a class that inherits from System.ServiceModel.Activation.ServiceHostFactory and override the method CreateServiceHost to host the internal endpoint. public class InternalServiceFactory : ServiceHostFactory { protected override ServiceHost CreateServiceHost(Type serviceType, Uri[] baseAddresses) { var internalEndpointAddress = string.Format( "http://{0}/NotificationService.svc", RoleEnvironment.CurrentRoleInstance.InstanceEndpoints["InternalHttpEndpoint"].IPEndpoint); ServiceHost host = new ServiceHost( typeof(NotificationService), new Uri(internalEndpointAddress)); BasicHttpBinding binding = new BasicHttpBinding(SecurityMode.None); host.AddServiceEndpoint( typeof(INotificationService), binding, internalEndpointAddress); return host; } } Note that you can use SecurityMode.None because the internal endpoint is private to the instances of the service. 6.   Edit the markup of the service right clicking the svc file and selecting "View markup" to add the new factory as the factory to be used to create the service <%@ ServiceHost Language="C#" Debug="true" Factory="Service.InternalServiceFactory" Service="Service.NotificationService" CodeBehind="NotificationService.svc.cs" %> 7.   Now you can notify changes to other instances using this code: var current = RoleEnvironment.CurrentRoleInstance; var endPoints = current.Role.Instances .Where(instance => instance != current) .Select(instance => instance.InstanceEndpoints["InternalHttpEndpoint"]); foreach (var ep in endPoints) { EndpointAddress address = new EndpointAddress( String.Format("http://{0}/NotificationService.svc", ep.IPEndpoint)); BasicHttpBinding binding = new BasicHttpBinding(SecurityMode.None); var factory = new ChannelFactory<INotificationService>(binding); INotificationService instance = factory.CreateChannel(address); instance.Notify(changedinfo); }

    Read the article

  • How do I compose an existing Moose role into a class at runtime?

    - by Oesor
    Say I define an abstract My::Object and concrete role implementations My::Object::TypeA and My::Object::TypeB. For maintainability reasons, I'd like to not have a hardcoded table that looks at the object type and applies roles. As a DWIMmy example, I'm looking for something along these lines in My::Object: has => 'id' (isa => 'Str', required => 1); sub BUILD { my $self = shift; my $type = $self->lookup_type(); ## Returns 'TypeB' {"My::Object::$type"}->meta->apply($self); } Letting me get a My::Object with My::Object::TypeB role applied by doing the following: my $obj = My::Object(id = 'foo') Is this going to do what I want or am I on the entirely wrong track? Edit: I simplified this too much; I don't want to have to know the type when I instantiate the object, I want the object to determine its type and apply the correct role's methods appropriately. I've edited my question to make this clearer.

    Read the article

  • asp.net Membership : Extending Role membership?

    - by mark smith
    Hi there, I am been taking a look at asp.net membership and it seems to provide everything that i need but i need some kind of custom Role functionality. Currently i can add user to a role, great. But i also need to be able to add Permissions to Roles.. i.e. Role: Editor Permissions: Can View Editor Menu, Can Write to Editors Table, Can Delete Entries in Editors Table. Currently it doesn't support this, The idea behind this is to create a admin option in my program to create a role and then assign permissions to a role to say "allow the user to view a certain part of the application", "allow the user to open a menu item" Any ideas how i would implement soemthing like this? I presume a custom ROLE provider but i was wondering if some kind of framework extension existed already without rolling my own? Or anybody knows a good tutorial of how to tackle this issue? I am quite happy with what asp.net SQL provider has created in terms of tables etc... but i think i need to extend this by adding another table called RolesPermissions and then I presume :-) adding some kind of enumeration into the table for each valid permission?? THanks in advance

    Read the article

  • Getting a list of Tasks that belong to a Role from Azman

    - by Steven
    I'm using the AZROLESLib which is from the COM references "azroles 1.0 Type Library" and I am trying to create a list of the designated tasks for each role that I have currently set in my authorization manager but when I loop through the tasks for the role, I get the role name. I've looked all around but couldn't find anything that would help. Here's what I got currently (It's not super pretty but i'm just trying to get it working at the moment). AzAuthorizationStoreClass AzManStore = new AzAuthorizationStoreClass(); AzManStore.Initialize(0, ConfigurationManager.ConnectionStrings["AzManStore"].ConnectionString, null); IAzApplication azApp = AzManStore.OpenApplication("StoreName", null); StringBuilder output = new StringBuilder(); Array tasks = null; foreach (IAzRole currentRole in azApp.Roles) { output.Append(currentRole.Name + "<br />"); tasks = (Array)currentRole.Tasks; foreach (object ob in tasks) { output.Append("&nbsp;&nbsp; -" + ob.ToString() + "<br />"); } } return output.ToString(); What comes out is: Administrator -Administrator Account Manager -Account Manager Corporate Marketing Specialist -Corporate Marketing Specialist General Employee -General Employee Marketing Manager -Marketing Manager Regional Marketing Specialist -Regional Marketing Specialist Sales Manager -Sales Manager Webmaster -Webmaster but what should come out is something like: Webmaster Websites Maintain News Maintain Events Maintain Reports Read Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14  | Next Page >