通过

Developing Applications Using Windows Authorization Manager White Paper Released!!!

  • 项目

Check it out!

https://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/dnnetserv/html/AzManApps.asp

Comments

  • Anonymous
    September 09, 2006
    I am trying to find this information but couldn't find it anywhere - How can I check if the user has access to a particular Task? I can check each Operation of the Task individually, but not a Task. Is there something like Task ID?Thanks.

  • Anonymous
    October 02, 2006
    As a note, this is a store operation.  You should favor the accesscheck for runtime.   There is a gotdotnet sample that does this at runtime (EDA - Enterprise Development Architecture I think is the name offhand) but once again I recommend modeling where task isnt the object you are checking.   Regards, David

  • Anonymous
    December 21, 2006
    The comment has been removed

  • Anonymous
    February 08, 2007
    I must have missed this post.  The call that you were looking for is in Win2k3 SP1 update. IAzClientContext2::GetAssignedScopesPage[C++] | IAzClientContext2.GetAssignedScopesPage http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa377854.aspx There are a number of ways to organize this dimension such as the newsgroup scenario where the scope is actually part of the data.   newsgroup1 newsgroup2 newsgroup3 become scopes with roles of admin, contributer and reader. The query to the database would use something like select articletitle,articletext,articleid where scopenamethatisgroupname=thescopename From the ui if making all visible you could either query distinctly from db or return the call to the store for the scopes that match a newsgroup. I am talking about whether you show all but give access to a few or only show those items which have assignment. Another way to look at it would be that there are known divisions - div1-n and have a similar query to the database. As for the computation expense, that varies based on your implementation.   Our implementation allows for a call to get rolls for each scope which allows you to control the implementation.  I think that addresses what you were recommending. Regards, David

  • Anonymous
    March 22, 2010
    I don't understand the point of having both Role Definitions and Role Assignments.   Why isn't there just the concept of 'Role' which contains both the definition of what tasks/ops it gives access to AND the assignments of who belongs to that role?