Walruz facilitates the separation between the authorization process on the business logic and the actions executed after the validation of the authorizations. To understand how it works, we will follow the following terminology:
- Subject
-
Object that is going to be managed (Profile, Posts).
- Actor
-
Entity that wants to perform an action on a subject (User, Admin).
- Policy
-
A set of rules that tells if the actor can perform the desired action on the subject.
Walruz provides modules and classes that help on the implementation of the concepts given previously, this are:
Walruz::Subject
-
Module that provides the interface to associate policies to an action in the subject.
Walruz::Actor
-
Module that provides the interface to perform queries to validate if an action can be done between the actor and the subject.
Walruz::Policy
-
Class that provides the interface to implement authorization logic.
Subject classes may specify a set of actions that can be performed to them using the check_authorization
method
class User include Walruz::Subject check_authorization :read => UserReadPolicy, :update => UserUpdatePolicy end
If there is just one policy to every possible action performed to the subject, you may specify the :default action, or just specify the Policy class.
Example:
class User include Walruz::Subject check_authorization UserPolicy end
or
class User include Walruz::Subject check_authorization :default => UserPolicy end
You can also specify other flags with the default flag.
class User include Walruz::Subject check_authorization :read => UserReadPolicy, :update => UserUpdatePolicy, :default => UserPolicy end
Actor classes can use several methods to check if the actor instance can perform the given action on a subject. This are:
can?(action, subject)
-
Returns boolean that says if the actor can execute or not the action on the subject.
authorize(action, subject)
-
In case the actor can execute the action on the subject, it returns the parameters hash from the policy, otherwise it will raise a
Walruz::NotAuthorized
. satisfies?(policy_label, subject)
-
It behaves just like the
can?
method, but instead of giving an action to be executed to the subject, it receives a policy label.
In case the given action is not assigned to any policy, a default Policy will be executed (if given), if no default policy is given then a Walruz::ActionNotFound
exception will be raised.
Examples:
current_user.can?(:read, friends_profile) #=> true current_user.satisfies?(:actor_is_admin, nil) #=> false current_user.satisfies(:actor_is_admin, nil) #=> nil current_user.authorize(:read, friends_profile) #=> Hash current_user.authorize!(:read, other_person_profile) # => raises Walruz::NotAuthorized
To implement a policy, it is necessary to inherit from the Walruz::Policy class. This class provides a method called authorized?
that return either a Boolean, or an Array of two items, the first one being a Boolean, and the second being a Hash of parameters returned from the Policy.
Every Policy Class also has a label associated to it, by default the label will be the name of the class in underscore case; if you want to have a custom label for a Policy Class, you can invoke the set_policy_label
method on the class context and specify the label that you want for it. This label is used on the satisfies?
method.
Examples:
class ActorIsAdmin < Walruz::Policy set_policy_label :is_admin def authorized?(actor, _) actor.is_admin? end end class UserIsFriend < Walruz::Policy def authorized?(current_user, friend) friendship = Friendship.first(:conditions => { :friend_id => current_user.id, :owner_id => friend.id}) if !friendship.nil? [true, { :friendship => friendship }] else false end end end # Examples using this policies with the satisfies method current_user.satisfies?(:is_admin, nil) # By default, the policy label is the name of the class in underscore case. current_user.satisfies?(:user_is_friend, other_user)
Sometimes policies can turn really messy, specially when you have a complex business model. The good news is that normally this complex policies are a composition of more simple policies (e.g. ActorCanSeeUserPictures
). Instead of creating this new classes that replicates the same logic of basic policies, we could merge them together in the following way:
ActorCanSeeUserPictures = Walruz::Utils.all(UserIsFriend, UserAllowsDisclosureOfPictures)
There is also the utility methods any
and not
, to create combinations of policies.
If your policy returns a parameters hash, and you are using the all
method, the parameters of each policy will be merged together, if you are using the any
method, the parameters of the first policy that returns true will be returned.
One other thing that the utility methods does for you is that it leaves its track on the returned policy parameters, when you invoke a composite policy, every policy will leave in the parameters hash the policy_label with a question mark at the end, that way you can know which policies were successful or not.
Example:
class ActorIsAdmin < Walruz::Policy set_policy_label :is_admin def authorized?(actor, _) actor.is_admin? end end class ActorIsSubject < Walruz::Policy def authorized?(actor, subject); actor == subject; end end UserReadPolicy = any(ActorIsSubject, ActorIsAdmin) class User < AbstractORM include Walruz::Subject check_authorizations :read => UserReadPolicy end class UsersController < Framework::Controller def show policy_params = current_user.authorize(:read, other_user) if policy_params[:actor_is_subject?] # do logic of the user interacting with herself elsif policy_params[:is_admin?] # do logic of the admin user interacting with other user else # do other logic here... end end end
Sometimes you would like to have a Policy that strictly depends in other policies, on the previous example UserAllowsDisclosureOfPictures
could have a dependency that says that only the User allows the disclosure of pictures if and only if there is a friend relationship, so we could re-implement this policy as:
Example:
class UserAllowsDisclosureOfPictures < Walruz::Policy depends_on UserIsFriend # ... end
Suppose you need the parameters returned by the previous Policy, you can have them with the params
method.
Example:
class UserAllowsDisclosureOfPictures < Walruz::Policy depends_on UserIsFriend def authorized?(_, _) params[:friendship].allows_disclosure_of_images? end end
Sometimes you would like to execute policies that are not directly related to a subject, but to the association of a subject. Given the example above of the friendship relationship and the disclosure of pictures, sometimes you would like to check if a user can see a picture directly on the picture model.
Suppose we have the following model in our system:
class Picture < AbstractORM belongs_to :owner end
and we would like to check if the current_user
can see (read) the picture using:
current_user.can?(:read, picture_instance)
If you may recall, we already implemented the logic that checks that authorization in UserAllowsDisclosureOfPictures
, but that policy only works when the subject is of class User; given that you have a subject of class Picture you can not re-use this policy.
You could solve this issue doing the following:
class PictureReadPolicy < Walruz::Policy def authorized?(user, image) user.satisfies?(UserAllowsDisclosureOfPictures, image.owner) end end
But as you may see, we are just creating new policies to handle old ones, we are not combining the policies effectively. To avoid this caveat, you can use the PolicyClass.for_subject
method:
PictureReadPolicy = UserAllowsDisclosureOfPictures.for_subject(:owner) class Picture < AbstractORM include Walruz::Subject belongs_to :owner check_authorizations :read => PictureReadPolicy end
The parameter of but_for
is the name of the subject’s method that will return a new subject, this new subject is then passed through the policy. Pretty neat eh?
Suppose you want to add an error to the authorization failure that is a more descriptive, you can do so on the authorized?
method passing a hash with a :error_message
key on the false return. If you use the can!
method on the actor model, this will become the Walruz::NotAuthorized
error message.
Example:
class SomePolicy < Walruz::Policy def authorized?(actor, subject) # some complex logic here return [false, { :error_message => 'More descriptive error message' }] end end
You’ll notice that once you start implementing policies for your system, you’ll be lost soon enough asking yourself which type of subject a Policy receives; to avoid such confusions, we suggest that you apply the following rules of thumb:
-
The first name of the policy should be the Subject class (e.g.
UserIsFriend
) -
If the policy only applies to the actor, the policy class name should start with the Actor word (e.g.
ActorIsAdmin
) -
You should always have the compositions of policies in just one place in your library folder (e.g. in
policies.rb
file). -
The result of policy compositions should finish with the word Policy (e.g
UserDeletePolicy = any(ActorIsSubject, ActorIsAdmin)
) -
Use
PolicyClass.but_for
when you are combining the policy class with other policies, if you are not doing this, consider checking authorizations on parents of the subject instead of the subject (e.g.current_user.can?(:see_pictures_of, picture.owner)
)
If you follow this rules, it will be much easier for you to merge policies together in an efficient way.
See walruz-rails gem.
You may check the project in the examples/ directory for more info; on the rails project, take a look on the spec/models/beatle_spec.rb
file, it’s really illustrating.
Copyright © 2009 Roman Gonzalez <romanandreg@gmail.com>.
Copyright © 2009 Noomii inc. <www.noomii.com>.
All rights reserved.