diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'doc/todo/Restrict_page_viewing.mdwn')
-rw-r--r-- | doc/todo/Restrict_page_viewing.mdwn | 36 |
1 files changed, 36 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/doc/todo/Restrict_page_viewing.mdwn b/doc/todo/Restrict_page_viewing.mdwn new file mode 100644 index 000000000..089d27fff --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/todo/Restrict_page_viewing.mdwn @@ -0,0 +1,36 @@ +I'd like to have some pages of my wiki to be only viewable by some users. + +I could use htaccess for that, but it would force the users to have +2 authentication mecanisms, so I'd prefer to use openID for that too. + +* I'm thinking of adding a "show" parameter to the cgi script, thanks + to a plugin similar to goto. +* When called, it would check the credential using the session stuff + (that I don't understand yet). +* If not enough, it would serve a 403 error of course. +* If enough, it would read the file locally on the server side and + return this as a content. + +Then, I'd have to generate the private page the regular way with ikiwiki, +and prevent apache from serving them with an appropriate and +much more maintainable htaccess file. + +-- [[users/emptty]] + +> While I'm sure a plugin could do this, it adds so much scalability cost +> and is so counter to ikiwiki's design.. Have you considered using the +> [[plugins/httpauth]] plugin to unify around htaccess auth? --[[Joey]] + +>> I'm not speaking of rendering the pages on demand, but to serve them on demand. +>> They would still be compiled the regular way; +>> I'll have another look at [[plugins/httpauth]] but I really like the openID whole idea. +>> --[[emptty]] + +>>> How about +>>> [mod_auth_openid](http://trac.butterfat.net/public/mod_auth_openid), then? +>>> A plugin for ikiwiki to serve its own pages is far afield from ikiwiki's roots, +>>> as Joey pointed out, but might be a neat option to have anyway -- for unifying +>>> authentication across views and edits, for systems not otherwise running +>>> web servers, for systems with web servers you don't have access to, and +>>> doubtless for other purposes. Such a plugin would add quite a bit of flexibility, +>>> and in that sense (IMO, of course) it'd be in the spirit of ikiwiki. --[[schmonz]] |