Brad Whitaker (whitaker) wrote in fotobilder,
Brad Whitaker

Protocol Auth Validation

gibson has been working on a Windows client and recently posed a question, which will apply to a lot of fotobilder clients and needs to be addressed. We need a way for the client to verify that a user-entered username/password is correct without actually performing any actions.

A couple of solutions:

1) No longer require a primary 'Mode' variable to be specified. This would allow users to submit a protocol request without actually specifying any methods to be run, effectively submitting an authenticated blank request envelope and receiving back a response that is blank in case of success (unless secondary methods such as GetChallenge are tacked on).

* pro: simple, lightweight, makes sense wrt existing response encapsulation paradigm
* con: unintuitive in the case that all a user receives in <FBResponse></FBResponse> back.

2) Create a new method (let's say 'ValidateAuth' for instance). This would probably accept a User/Auth argument and return a method response with success/failure.

* pro: clients get back something that makes it very clear whether the auth was correct or not
* con: lots of special cases and confusion about root User/Auth and ValidateAuth.User/ValidateAuth.Auth variables, etc ... started working on this and problems sprouted up left and right, so I stopped.

After thinking a bit and talking to mahlon, my personal opinion is that something along the lines of (1) is the lease confusing and most useful to client authors.

So the questions are: How can I do something similar and make the response more intuitive. Is it really that unintuitive anyway? If you send a request to FotoBilder and don't specify any methods to run, would you expect anything back other than a blank response containing no errors?

I'd like to get some suggestions / thoughts. Especially from people working on new FB Protocol v2 clients. Remember one of the primary goals is to make this understandable to the average would-be client author.

  • 302: lj_dev

    In the interests of consolidating all FotoBilder development-related discussion, we're going to be closing down this community. The same…

  • Development stalled?

    Is the development of Fotobilder held? Stalled? I am asking because there is no activity on the community and there is no link to the Fotobilder…

  • (no subject)

    Does FotoBilder works with Apache2? I installed all the required modules on my debian sarge, and when I restart my apache server, it dies horribly…

  • Post a new comment


    Comments allowed for members only

    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic