-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 168
Document the Password-based Mechanisms Known Limitations #4283
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Text looks and reads OK
As a result, there are three known limitations. | ||
These are: | ||
|
||
#. Directly sharing the storage or any its sub-folders will fail. They will not appear to the recipient, because the mount cannot be set up due to missing credentials. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
or any of its...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can you clarify further?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Just adding the word "of"
|
||
.. note:: **Enterprise Users Only** | ||
|
||
The enterprise version has a mode called "Save in DB" where the credentials are saved, encrypted, in the database (via :doc:`the WND app <../../../enterprise/external_storage/windows-network-drive_configuration>`). In this mode, all of the above operations can work. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
can work
or will work
?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
credentials are saved, encrypted,
--> credentials are encrypted saved
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
-> credentials are saved in encrypted form
the latter sound a bit German 😉
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
you are right... 🙈
Thanks for reviewing it
Known Limitations | ||
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ | ||
|
||
Please be aware that because of the way that credentials are stored in ownCloud, any operations must be performed by the logged-in mount owner, because credentials are not stored anywhere. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
what about: are stored in ownCloud
--> are stored in ownCloud community version
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Q: is this at least true for personal shared mounts. Is it also true for admin shared mounts or is it the same?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
this sentence sounds contradictory because first it talks about "the way that credentials are stored" then later it says "not stored anywhere"
the limitation exists for both admin and personal mounts where both have the "log-in credentials, save in session" option
|
||
#. Directly sharing the storage or any its sub-folders will fail. They will not appear to the recipient, because the mount cannot be set up due to missing credentials. | ||
#. Any background task operating on the storage, such as background scanning. | ||
#. Any :doc:`occ command <../configuration/server/occ_command>` that operates on the storage like occ files:scan will fail. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
does fail mean that there will be a error message or does it just not do it without notifying the user.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Good question. @PVince81, can you clarify?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
On quick scan, the best that I can make out is that an exception will be thrown, dumping a stacktrace to the console.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@PVince81, @phil-davis can you clarify?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't know and don't have a quick setup to try this out right now. How about changing to "will have no effect" which could mean any of "fail", "show an error" or "do nothing"
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I have not tried this directly myself, so not confident to advise!
As a result, there are three known limitations. | ||
These are: | ||
|
||
#. Directly sharing the storage or any its sub-folders will fail. They will not appear to the recipient, because the mount cannot be set up due to missing credentials. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Does this affect federation?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@PVince81, @phil-davis can you clarify?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I have not tried this directly myself, so not confident to advise words related to "local" and ""federated" sharing.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The sharing action doesn't fail. It will go through but the recipient will not see mounted.
Federated sharing is affected as well because it works on "public link share token" basis (or something similar) which itself doesn't contain the user's storage password, so the storage cannot be mounted either.
I've raised owncloud/core#32110 to hide the sharing option completely in the ext storage settings as it cannot work in such scenarios.
@PVince81 @phil-davis @mmattel any further feedback? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
👍
@settermjd please backport |
Fixes
#4239.