Morganni Wrote:Actually, this is something that's bugging me about a lot of the comments on that post. Because, based on my understanding of the Rails framework, the right place to put the security checks wouldn't be in the code that's getting complained about *anyway*. If they make use of the tools, they will in essence be -doing it right-.
Ok perhaps I messed up in my use of construction analogy then. Allow me to restate:
There are Large gaps in the use and handling of authenticated user privileges. They are confusing the fact that a user is authenticated (this person who says they are bob realy is bob) with allowed (authenticated bob should not be allowed access to information about alice)
This ignorance of scope is one of the basics they seem to just not get. And one of first things you deal with when it comes to dealing with hostile users.
I don't have a lot of experience with ruby on rails, but I know enough to say that this level of security is something you need to bake into the code. It isn't something that can be added on later (ok it can be, but it costs exponentially more to do so. Your better off rewriting in most cases). If it can't be handled in code (something I highly doubt given the articles linked above) they they should not be using the framework.
-Terry
-----
"so listen up boy, or pornography starring your mother will be the second worst thing to happen to you today"
TF2: Spy