|Subject||RE: RE: [Firebird-Architect] Re: [Firebird-devel] User semantics vs authentication|
> > Well that brings up a good question: What calls is a securitynot
> > plug-in responsible for?
> > - Authenticating Users?
> > - Providing User Information (i.e. Name)?
> > - Adding/Updating User Information in FB$User table?
> > - Providing User's SQL Role on connection (i.e. overriding the value
> > provided in the connection 'string')?
> > - Providing User's list of Security Groups on connection? (this is
> > a new
> > thing I'd like -- groups in addition to roles -- but that is another
> > discussion)
> > To my mind, the answer to all these questions is: Yes.
> Does it sound too simple to think of security plug-in as a driver
> (associated with FB-engine application) accessing secure (or may be
> secure) database through this database secure (or, again, not secure)I don't understand your comment/reply, please elaborate.
> protocol ? May be with this approach other FB security-related things
> can be easier tackled together ?