|
While I don't know the internals of LDAP I would never use it for external users. You would then be registering external users in your domain, probably not a smart idea.
We use LDAP for all our internal authentication and most of out authorisation and we end up with user group (1000s of them) like APP_CTRY_DEPT_ROLE which we then have to parse in the client app.
It used to be fairly slow but I can't tell any more as our PCs are crippled with enterprise security and I have no idea where to lay the blame.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
|
You could potentially use ADAM, which would keep your application data separate from your internal AD domain: Active Directory Application Mode[^]
But it would add an extra layer of complexity over a simple database solution. One large product we work with has recently switched from ADAM to SQL for authentication, because they couldn't get ADAM working reliably.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
thanks, but do you recommend for or against ldap, or perhaps it doesn't matter?
|
|
|
|
|
I'd probably be inclined to stick with a normal database, unless an LDAP solution was going to offer some significant benefits. I only tend to use LDAP if I need to talk to an existing AD domain.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
There's nothing wrong with using LDAP for your AAA needs. It's a standardized system with a standardized querying mechanism that is designed to provide RBAC solutions, and is far superior in this role to a database in many different ways. From a security standpoint, it blows a standard database out of the water.
That said, if you don't have anyone on staff that is cozy with handling a domain, you can potentially create some very serious issues by using one (specifically by providing user accounts to anonymous, external users). It is very important that it is actively managed, that containers are properly segmented, and that user accounts have a real validation mechanism backing them (email + reCAPTCHA, etc).
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."
- Benjamin Disraeli
|
|
|
|
|
I have asked this question in Quick Q&A, but I only got one answer there, and that answer also said something I agree with. That is that the quick answers are not the place for that answer, so I have accepted it, based on the two sample documents and styles it gave, but now I'm asking the same question on a proper board, hopefully to glean more answers/discussion.
I suppose what I'm actually asking for is at best a template, then some suggestions of what areas I must specify.
I have a business spec in terms of user stories together with additional validation rules etc. per story.
I think my spec, which should be divided into front and back-end, for two teams of developers, will be quite large on the basic makeup of the app - how it should be implemented (ASP.NET MVC is a requirement, as that is our standard), and thorough descriptions of the horizontal services. It will then have small appendages of detail for each use case. Am I on the correct track here?
Immanentize the Eschaton!
|
|
|
|
|
Current physical -> current logical -> new logical -> new physical.
Sounds like you're at the "new logical" phase.
You can now do a proper "logical" design at this point (DFD's; ERD's; data dictionary; EPC's; UML; pseudo-code; etc.); or go "agile" and just start programming.
"(I) am amazed to see myself here rather than there ... now rather than then".
― Blaise Pascal
|
|
|
|
|
Brady Kelly wrote: I have a business spec in terms of user stories together with additional validation rules etc. per story.
So you have a description of what the system, the entire system, will do.
Brady Kelly wrote: I think my spec, which should be divided into front and back-end, for two teams of developers, will be quite large on the basic makeup of the app
You have a description of what it will do. You do not have a description of how it will do it.
Those are two different things.
And a "large" system should start with one or more architecture documents so there is some framework for understanding how the pieces will fit together. That plus some more specific designs will also provide direction on how front and back end work is divided. If there are pieces that cannot be quickly white boarded or where there are arguments about the 'best' way to do it, then it needs to be designed.
|
|
|
|
|
what is difference between test case and test scenario?Have any Real time Testing Documents please send my email id
anandroy1995@gmail.com
|
|
|
|
|
Test Case: Too lazy to use Google
Scenario: Case in point
"(I) am amazed to see myself here rather than there ... now rather than then".
― Blaise Pascal
|
|
|
|
|
Folks, Could you please help to get resource to learn Design Pattern using C#?
|
|
|
|
|
Try doing some research Google search
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
|
Yes google search is the best option.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hello,
I'm an architecture student and our master asked me to make a concept sign that shows Stephen hawking thoughts !
I'm very confused, couldn't reach a concept so far
Like we have Statue of Liberty as a sign of freedom right ?
So I want something like that which shows Stephen hawking thoughts !
Can you guys help me and give me a simple and creative concept so I can make an architectural model
Thank you very much I'll look forward to your replies
|
|
|
|
|
Black holes. Worm holes.
"(I) am amazed to see myself here rather than there ... now rather than then".
― Blaise Pascal
|
|
|
|
|
Architecture of his thoughts? Well, the four major urges will still be determining his being. Untill a professor steals his browser-history we will not know wheter he thinks as often about sex as the average man.
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Foxxx F wrote: our master asked me
And how is someone else giving you the conceptual idea going to help you going to fit that criteria.
I do think you are safe asking this question on a geek site, an architecture professor is unlikely to be browsing the forums 
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
|
Hi, I'm looking for a classic and simple N-Tier design using earlier .NET architecture rather than MVC. I haven't done this for years.
I was thinking of having a class with my table structure in terms of the properties/fields. Then maybe having a separate DAL class for the methods such as Read, Save, Update and Delete. In terms of the class design, if I have several tables using the same methods, is there a particular design I should follow.
I realise there are many ways of achieving this but I'm looking for something simple that junior developers can follow easily. Can somebody please recommend or maybe offer a link to a good article for this? Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
I need to design a system where I need to check if a key exists or not.
Currently I am already using aerospike for the cause but my use case is slightly different.
I will have a key like this ( A group of 3 integers)
<clientid>-<campaignid>-<userid>
For eg.
1-105-1133441
222-1000-1891893
I just need to know if this key exists or not in the set.
If exists return 1 else set the key and return 0. So that next time the query will return 1
This has to be a tcp service because the checks/set will happen from multiple servers
The point is if a campaign is live the queries will be very dense ( upto 20k/s ). So the key lookup has to be in memory. But after that I still have to retain the set but it has to be on disk , so that memory can be freed up for other campaigns. I do not expect more that 20-30 campaigns to be live.
Whenever the next time an old campaign gets a query again , the server should bring it back to memory and serve the requests from memory. The first query will be slow because it has to kickoff a read from disk but next query onwards will be very fast.
I am using aerospike for now , but there is a problem that aeorspike stores all keys in memory. When it is practically useless to have old campaigns in memory unless they get triggered again
The total number of keys is practially unlimited. But let us consider 50 million keys per campaign and I may need to store 100k campaign data. Of which only < 50 will be live at any given point of time.
Any ideas how I can implement this
So what should I use for this
|
|
|
|
|
A 16GB machine can keep 50 campaigns completely in memory. Transfering compressed keys from files to memory is not an issue. Paging will handle any extras.
"(I) am amazed to see myself here rather than there ... now rather than then".
― Blaise Pascal
|
|
|
|
|
i apologize if this is not the right forum.
We are looking to have 2 programs developed that will auto generate the following 2 puzzle types:
1. Word Search Puzzle -
* auto-generate a word-search puzzle (without curse words embedded),
* based on a list of words (up to 30 words)
* 15 letters across x 15 letters down
* words at least 3-letters in length
* answer key
2. Crossword Puzzle -
* auto-generate a crossword puzzle (without curse words embedded),
* based on a list of clues(approx 60-70 clues up + 60-70 clues down)
* words at least 3-letters in length
* answer key
|
|
|
|
|
Not only is this not the right forum, it's not the right site. If you are looking for someone to write code for you, try rentacoder.
This space for rent
|
|
|
|
|
When you get stuck on a specific part of the code then come back and ask and we'll gladly help you through it; but no, no one is going to write all this code for you.
There are two kinds of people in the world: those who can extrapolate from incomplete data.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
Hello all,
I have just moved from Windows environment to Linux, and have been asked to update a project - still learning but tips would be helpful!
I have a directory structure:
RootMakefile.mk
.
.--\GUI1 (Folder)
. |
--dataprep(Folder)
. ---makefile1.mk
--config(Folder)
.--\GUI2 (Folder)
. |
--dataprep(Folder)
....makefile2.mk
--config(Folder)
.
.---\GUI(n) (Folder)
|
--dataprep(Folder)
....makefile(n).mk
--config(Folder)
makefile1.mk...makefile(n).mk are similar with just the variables within changing the paths, and the task is to move all makefiles to the root so they don't need to updated each time a new GUI is added to the project.
I changed the root makefile as following:
GUI_PATH := $(wildcard GUI*/)
TARGET_FILE := GuiDetails.rb
ACTIVE_GUIS := $(filter %, $(wildcard SMA*/$(TARGET_FILE)))
GUIS_OF_INTEREST := $(filter %, $(dir $(ACTIVE_GUIS)))
DATAPREP_FOLDER := dataprep
CONFIG_FOLDER := config
DATAPREP_PATHS := $(foreach GUIS_OF_INTEREST,$(GUIS_OF_INTEREST), $(GUIS_OF_INTEREST)$(DATAPREP_FOLDER))
CONFIG_PATHS := $(foreach GUIS_OF_INTEREST,$(GUIS_OF_INTEREST), $(GUIS_OF_INTEREST)$(CONFIG_FOLDER))
Now I seem to have all the folders that containing the Target file and so the makefile(1)...makefile(n), tried this to make sure:
test:
$(warning The following paths have guis $(GUIS_OF_INTEREST))
$(warning The following gui paths have dataprep $(foreach GUIS_OF_INTEREST, $(GUIS_OF_INTEREST), $(GUIS_OF_INTEREST)$(DATAPREP_FOLDER)))
$(warning The following gui paths have config $(foreach GUIS_OF_INTEREST, $(GUIS_OF_INTEREST), $(GUIS_OF_INTEREST)$(CONFIG_FOLDER)))
Is there a way now to move the makefiles within the folders to the root, and change the path variables dynamically so the guis can be generated for all different folders from a single makefile?
examples are:
(Within .\GUI1):
$(call DEF_RULES,GUI1,nodll)
$(call INCL,dataprep)
(Within .\GUI1\dataprep\):
GUI1_ALL:=$(call CANONICAL_PATH,$(GUI1_CONFIG)/GUI1_generated.txt)
GUI1_GWM:=$(call CANONICAL_PATH,$(GUI1_CONFIG)/gwm.xml)
GUI1_SSH:=$(call CANONICAL_PATH,$(GUI1_CONFIG)/ssh.xml)
GUI1_SSH_SUB:=$(call CANONICAL_PATH,$(GUI1_CONFIG)/ssh_sub.xml)
GUI1_SSH_APPROACH:=$(call CANONICAL_PATH,$(GUI1_CONFIG)/ssh_approach.xml)
This would be helpful as new GUIs are added and all the variables in the nested makefile don't have to updated with the new GUI path. The number of GUIs will increase as the project progresses.
Thanks in advance! I know this might sound really novice, but this is the first time I have had to use makefile and really would appreciate the help!
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
