Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[Research] federated sharing and exposing the system address book #37798

Closed
5 tasks done
Tracked by #19575
miaulalala opened this issue Apr 18, 2023 · 1 comment
Closed
5 tasks done
Tracked by #19575

[Research] federated sharing and exposing the system address book #37798

miaulalala opened this issue Apr 18, 2023 · 1 comment
Assignees
Labels
enhancement pending documentation This pull request needs an associated documentation update
Milestone

Comments

@miaulalala
Copy link
Contributor

miaulalala commented Apr 18, 2023

Federated sharing will break the encapsulation for the address books: #19575 (comment)

Questions:

  • GDPR compliance - Results from call with @ChristophWurst - don't show any federated contacts, only the contacts with the CLOUD property that matches my instance.
  • How memory intensive is filtering for the CLOUD property mentioned - handle the filtering via DB query
  • Should admins be able to allow / disallow this behaviour - no, this should be disabled by default - i. e. encapsulate system address book no matter if the instance is fedrated or not.
  • Are guest users added to the system address book? Yes, they do. Does that need to be avoided?
  • Do they have an address book home / user principal, i. e. are they able to access the system address book? Yes they do?

The big question is if guests should be added to the system? @schiessle and I say no, especially since it can be a data leak point in conjunction with federated sharing

Results from testing system address books with federated sharing: each federated share has their own system address book!

@miaulalala miaulalala added enhancement 0. Needs triage Pending check for reproducibility or if it fits our roadmap labels Apr 18, 2023
@miaulalala miaulalala self-assigned this Apr 18, 2023
@miaulalala miaulalala added 1. to develop Accepted and waiting to be taken care of and removed 0. Needs triage Pending check for reproducibility or if it fits our roadmap labels Apr 18, 2023
@miaulalala miaulalala added this to the Nextcloud 27 milestone Apr 18, 2023
@miaulalala miaulalala removed the 1. to develop Accepted and waiting to be taken care of label May 4, 2023
@miaulalala
Copy link
Contributor Author

Research is done, document the following:

Guest users are not synced
X-NC-SCOPE

@miaulalala miaulalala added the pending documentation This pull request needs an associated documentation update label May 4, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement pending documentation This pull request needs an associated documentation update
Projects
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant