ZF-Commons/zfc-rbac

Support chat for https://github.com/ZF-Commons/zfc-rbac/

Bas Kamer

@basz

Thanks sir! Mission completed.

Vytautas Stankus

@svycka

thanks @basz @prolic gitter somehow sent me mention notification :D

Vytautas Stankus

@svycka

what about #320?

Vytautas Stankus

@svycka

also what do you think about this old suggestion https://github.com/ZF-Commons/zfc-rbac/pull/320#issuecomment-257138222

Bas Kamer

@basz

@svycka just in time for your :beer: got warm I hope... ;-) I think I addressed the mentioned concerns from #320 into #379. So it should be trivial enough to apply the same to #320. Personally I don't have the time to move it forward, but it is on -the list-.

Vytautas Stankus

@svycka

I think maybe if 3.0 will be released soon maybe we don't need to merge this to v2

Vytautas Stankus

@svycka

and I a bit thought about plugin managers and I think it would be good idea to introduce new interfaces like AssertionContainerInterface if we want to separate zf service manager otherwise its no point to not use FactoryInterface in factories as we still depend on zf service manager

Sascha-Oliver Prolic

@prolic

Are we only dependend on service manager? No other zend components? If so, decoupling would make totally sense

Vytautas Stankus

@svycka

I think we have service-manager and stdlib

and stdlib is only required because of ModuleOptions I think we could get ride of it too but don't know about this

Sascha-Oliver Prolic

@prolic

Ok, let's remive this and make it totally middlewarish?

Vytautas Stankus

@svycka

this is not related to middlewares or I dont get your point

Sascha-Oliver Prolic

@prolic

Ok forget about middleware for now, but if it's 100% framework agnostic, then why still ZF in the name? I want symfony guys to use it as well then.

Vytautas Stankus

@svycka

maybe because zf guys created it :D

also symfony guys already can use it even with zend-servicemanager

Sascha-Oliver Prolic

@prolic

However, a symfony bundle and docs on how to integrate in laravel would be nice

Vytautas Stankus

@svycka

I guess that could be separate projects with related autoloading and everyting they need

Sascha-Oliver Prolic

@prolic

Maybe

Vytautas Stankus

@svycka

but that is possible now. no?

Bas Kamer

@basz

isn't the plugin manager a zend-servicemanager thing? thus only usable with

AssertionContainerInterface would be get($name, $options)?

Vytautas Stankus

@svycka

yes but if we only need that could be implemented with anything

Bas Kamer

@basz

you mean: "want to be able to?"

Vytautas Stankus

@svycka

we don't use options for assertions

Sascha-Oliver Prolic

@prolic

Mh, in this case we could think about dropping this additional container, just use default container instead

Vytautas Stankus

@svycka

yep be able to because this is only thing that we need from service manager

@prolic I thought that to but we need return type AssertionInterface

Bas Kamer

@basz

I'm not against it, anything more frameowrk agnostic is good in my opinion. Even when I personally only use zend-servicemanager as DI implementation.

Vytautas Stankus

@svycka

@basz me too :)

Bas Kamer

@basz

I though about doing that also, but didn't realize, the plugin manager never gets feeded options...

So I just left it for now.

Sascha-Oliver Prolic

@prolic

Simply check given return type and throw if needed

Vytautas Stankus

@svycka

also just sow something strange we can have only one role provider? then why we need RoleProviderPluginManager?

https://github.com/ZF-Commons/zfc-rbac/blob/develop/src/Container/RoleServiceFactory.php#L48-L49

Vytautas Stankus

@svycka

and https://github.com/ZF-Commons/zfc-rbac/blob/develop/src/Container/ObjectRepositoryRoleProviderFactory.php is not psr-11 compatible $requestedName, ?array $options = [] is servicemanager thing

Bas Kamer

@basz

awsome! Is v2 capable of more then one provider? I guess it could be useful to have multiple providers, but not a necessity. I certainly havent used more then one ever

Vytautas Stankus

@svycka

I will try to limit it to one because even docs says: Roles can come from any sources: in memory, from a file, from a database... However, please note that since ZfcRbac
2.0, you can specify only one role provider per application. The reason is that having multiple role providers make
the workflow harder and can lead to security problems that are very hard to spot.

Bas Kamer

@basz

Then I would say we need no plugin manager...

Vytautas Stankus

@svycka

I will update my PR with this

Bas Kamer

@basz

:thumbsup:

Vytautas Stankus

@svycka

But I guess this will be tomorrow.

Vytautas Stankus

@svycka

ok started removing can you check if I dont do something stupid? I will continue tomorrow

Brendan Nash

@brendanjnash_twitter

Hi all - I need some direction on testing a route which is access controlled by rbac. I am not quite sure how to authorize the test to access the route...

Sascha-Oliver Prolic

@prolic

simply mock it and always allow

Brendan Nash

@brendanjnash_twitter

ok - Yeah, I was not 100% sure what to mock and how to implement it. I posted this on SO https://stackoverflow.com/questions/54029276/how-do-i-use-phpunit-to-test-a-controller-under-zfr-rbac (Hopefully if I can work it out it can stand as a resource for others)

Brendan Nash

@brendanjnash_twitter

@prolic Been playing with this today. I tried to mock it but I keep getting "you are not authorized to access this resource". Essentially I am trying this: $this->guard = $this->createMock(AbstractGuard::class);
$this->guard->method('onResult')->willReturn(true);
$this->dispatch('/cp/overview');
$this->assertResponseStatusCode(200);

Sascha-Oliver Prolic

@prolic

I assume your mocked guard is not used

This might help: ZF-Commons/zfc-rbac#334

Brendan Nash

@brendanjnash_twitter

Yes, that helped, a lot. Thank you!

Sascha-Oliver Prolic

@prolic

welcome

Where communities thrive

People

Repo info

Activity