Time  Nick       Message
20:21 whartung   xacml isn't popular jackalista because it's overcomplicated.
20:20 whartung   :)
20:20 pdurbin    whartung: I'm getting a lot of mileage out of those slides. :)
20:19 pdurbin    :)
20:12 jackalista as if!  :P
20:12 jackalista love the head first design patternss, lol
19:48 jackalista thanks pdurbin, will check that out
19:42 pdurbin    jackalista: no idea if this is of interest but a coworker of mine developed a whole permissions system thing that we think is pretty granualar: http://iqss.github.io/javaone2014-bof5619/#40
19:33 jackalista Thank you, very intersted in what you have to say.  XACML is good as it's seprate from biz logic, but does it scale?  And how best to scale it?  Etc...
19:33 jackalista fine grained might mean that youy have access to budgets, but just those of a specific client, and only those of that client relating to a specific project, or set of projects, for ecxample.  Make sense?
19:32 jackalista due to finishing a contract, etc.
19:32 jackalista we have complex data, and several sets of users.  Some are our FTE's, some are our client's FTE's and some are freelancvers, basically, who have access now, and to multiple parties, butwill have access curtailed shortly
19:30 jackalista but I am wondering why isn't XACML more widely adopted?
19:30 jackalista generally looking at base pf RBAC with layer of ABAC tightening.  I have seen XACML, and it may be the answer (pdurbin, thx!)
19:30 jackalista sec must be tight
19:29 jackalista Hey -- sorry, in meetings, but will pop back shortly.  We are financial systems, and handling payments for well known companies and individuals so
18:55 vanHoesel  #### this all, to avoid nasty URL that include a language subtrtee of the api
18:55 vanHoesel  or doing more scary stuff "adding a new translation with PUT" (since we have the URI) and removing one single representation when doing "DELETE with a Content-LAnguage" or the entire resource, without
18:53 vanHoesel  I would like to see that we use "Content-Language: bar" for the other methods, telling the server the language we represent when doing a POST or PUT
18:51 vanHoesel  ... using "Accept-Language: foo"
18:51 vanHoesel  where with GET we can request the server to give us a representation in a specific language
18:50 vanHoesel  Basicly, it does the for unsafe methods, what Content -Negotiation does for GET
18:49 vanHoesel  I've been pondering and actually created an implentation as well for (what i call for now) HTTP-Authoring... and like to get some feed back
18:00 whartung   xacml is basically for redaction
17:55 pdurbin    jackalista: how fine grained are we talking?
17:49 fumanchu   (in my least snarky voice) how much ubiquity should one expect? I've been doing web dev for 15 years and have yet to need to share and therefore standardize on access control management
17:49 * pdurbin  looks at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XACML
17:41 jackalista smark remarks encouraged, serious responses preferred ;)
17:40 jackalista dunk, as it separates access logic from app / API business logic but I'm not seeing ubiquitous adoption.  What's the deal?
17:39 jackalista What are people seeing as best practices for fine grained access control within the REST world?    I would have thought that XACML's JSON binding for REST would be a slam
02:06 pdurbin    tired. going home. maybe i need a diagram
02:05 seanbrant  pdurbin: I wasn’t sure if i should query the identity server for it when I need it
00:47 pdurbin    seanbrant: you have to get that access token to GitHub somehow
00:41 fumanchu_  as long as they're all separate RFC's and not mandatory extensions, let 'em dig their holes
00:35 pdurbin    o/
00:35 whartung   gotta cya tomorrow
00:35 whartung   all that time wasted
00:34 whartung   I mean, I agree, JSON LOOKS better than XML, but here they, re-inventing it all over again.
00:34 whartung   nope, just cackling as JSON explodes in to the similar complexities that afflicts XML.
00:33 pdurbin    whartung: are you saying seanbrant should use SAML?
00:32 whartung   JSON Web Signature is 67 pages
00:31 whartung   lol
00:30 whartung   I wonder how long it will be before we simply fall back in to sexpressions
00:27 whartung   "JSON is easy!"
00:27 whartung   good thing the RFC is 35 pages!
00:26 whartung   no, I have not heard of JWT
00:26 whartung   I just have to lol as we continue to replicate all of the XML world in to JSON...
00:07 pdurbin    never heard of it but maybe whartung has
00:06 seanbrant  yeah
00:06 pdurbin    this? JSON Web Tokens - http://jwt.io
00:02 seanbrant  This more of a JWT security question but here it goes. I have a identity server that returns jwt tokens used as access tokens to auth with my api server. The identity server also allows authing with thridparty services like github. If you connect your github account i’d like to pass your github access token to the api to make github calls. Is it a bad idea to embed that access token into the JWT?