[pmwiki-users] Pmwe and Userauth help . . .
dausha at gmail.com
Thu Feb 3 07:54:32 CST 2005
On Thu, 03 Feb 2005 08:42:52 +0100, Patrick Ogay <lists at basel-inside.ch> wrote:
> I'm looking for a userbased solution quite urgently.
> At the moment I'm trying to improve UserAuth (from James McDuffie)
> http://www.pmwiki.org/wiki/Cookbook/UserAuth , but I'm open.
> I think the design of UserAuth is pretty well as a base. But in this
> version, it seem's to conflikt with BasicAuth, resp. it behaves in a way
> I don't understand :-)
It uses a different value in the post. When I tried to get it to work
with a different cookbook recipe, I found that trying to get Userauth
to use the proper value causes serious problems. So, I just inserted
the Userauth "custom" field into the other recipe.
> And what I'm trying to work out is a flexible solution for my own wiki
> *user - abilities
> *user - **teams - abilities (I like to predefine some default groups,
> as guest, project1...)
> *user pw is given by admin, but **user can change.
> **extend over Wikifarm
Sounds essentially the same as Unix user/group. I've thought of
something along the same lines. I'm tempted to reproduce the Twiki
method for user authentication, and basing user-permissions by wiki
farm. That is, a user is added to each farm-as-a-group. However, you
are right in that there should only be one authentication table for
the entire Farm to share.
What might work is to have each Farm/local have a "user_allowed" file.
Then, each user is given their level of accessibility (e.g.
PatrickOgay:read,edit) in $farm_path/local/user_allowed. Then, at the
center of the Farm ($root_path), is an .htpasswd with Apache's
BasicAuthentication. If the $farm/local/user_allowed has
"everybody:read," then that field does not need authentication to
> If your pmwe based solution is finished now, I will certainly have a
> closer look at it
" Mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur"
More information about the pmwiki-users