Subject | Re: [Firebird-Architect] Re: Create User Proposal |
---|---|
Author | Jim Starkey |
Post date | 2004-09-24T11:28:41Z |
Leyne, Sean wrote:
be added to the account parameter block; if a security plugin didn't
support it, it could just throw an error. But as a core property, it
would encourage security plugins to support it.
I'm quite sure that the most favored security model will be account
information stored in a database itself, and disable user is no problem
at all.
>Alexander,I think the idea has real merit and is worth adding. The option would
>
>
>
>>>From: Jim Starkey <jas@...>
>>>I propose that we add the following commands to Firebird SQL
>>>
>>>
>beginning
>
>
>>>with 2.0 (if possible):
>>>
>>> create user <username> [set] password <quoted string>
>>> alter user <username> [[set] password <quoted string>]
>>> drop user <username>
>>>
>>>
>>Also, perhaps the concept of 'disabling' user can be
>>added, as in alter user <username> [enable|disable];
>>
>>
>
>Interesting idea... not sure about the practical benefit
>
>
>
>
>In the long run with moving user security to an external source;
>
>- what effect would making a user inactive have for a database?
>- does this feature make sense in that model (external security)?
>- what error message would they receive when they try to attach a
>database?
>
>
>
>
be added to the account parameter block; if a security plugin didn't
support it, it could just throw an error. But as a core property, it
would encourage security plugins to support it.
I'm quite sure that the most favored security model will be account
information stored in a database itself, and disable user is no problem
at all.