Extend Security Provider with Permissions from Database

[magdy.reda]

Thank you @Hyperbytes for posting the video, as I was just working on this scenario where any user can have multiple permission levels.

Next question on the same topic would be how to implement it with a many-to-many relationship.

As explained in your video, the permissions are forced into the db via a drop-down list. If I want to add a new permission level, I’d need to modify the html code within the page.

Maybe, a clearer separation between model and view would be achieved by having:

• the users listed in a table tb_users
• the permissions listed in a table tb_permissions
• the relationship between the two represented as a many-to-many table between tb_users and tb_permissions

This way, adding a new type of permission would be achieved by updating the db, not working on the html code.

However, it seems to me that such a case cannot be realized by current implementation of Wappler Security Provider.

Any idea? Suggestion? Tks.

[Hyperbytes]

The problem is that the query generated acts upon the security provider so the permission name MUST be defined within the security provider to work so trying to define a new permission type outside the security provider definition will not be possible.

I would be nice to be able to be able to “inject” a new permission via a query but that would require code changes to the security provider and I don’t know if that would be feasible .
You need to ask @George about that one.

[George]

Made a feature request about this one

[JonL]

Removed my vote because Dynamic Bindings make more sense as it allows more flexibility.

Dynamic bindings in conditions of Permissions

Similar but I think that using SC bindings makes more sense. Right now we have a hard-coded permission system. Implementing a database hardcoded approach would just extend a tiny bit the options. What if I want to store my permissions on a file? Or what if I want to implement a custom module that spits my permissions. All in all, I think bindings(which cover DBs) make more sense and results in a more Wapplery way.