just trying to work my way around using Redemption; I've got the following code to retrieve the RDOAccounts (Email accounts) from the default Profile:
Profiles profiles = (Profiles)Activator.CreateInstance(Type.GetTypeFromProgID("ProfMan.Profiles"));
Profile defaultProfile = profiles.DefaultProfile;
//open a RDOSession for this profile
RDOSession session = RedemptionLoader.new_RDOSession();
session.Logon(defaultProfile.Name);
RDOAccounts accounts = session.Accounts;
Where I'm stuck is trying to determine which of the RDOAccount objects is set as the default email account - there doesn't seem to be any property on the object that I can use to see whether it's the default or not.
Anyone done this before?
Use RDOSession.Accounts collection, in particular RDOAccounts.GetOrder method: http://www.dimastr.com/redemption/RDOAccounts.htm
I think this works - but if anyone's got a more elegant solution I'd love to hear it!
RDOAccount defaultAccount = session.GetDefaultFolder(rdoDefaultFolders.olFolderInbox).Store.StoreAccount;
Use RDOSession.Accounts collection, in particular RDOAccounts.GetOrder method.
Related
I am getting an error when trying to add AppRoleAssignment for a user:
{"odata.error":{"code":"Request_BadRequest","message":{"lang":"en","value":"One or more properties are invalid."},"date":"2017-10-21T14:49:42","requestId":"3aacf13e-5620-40da-8fd0-fb2d4130f171","values":null}}
When i use an actual ApproleId, everything works fine. However, when i set
AppRoleAssignment.Id = new Guid(); i get the above error;
This does not make sense, because the documentation says that this is allowed
by setting zero GUID and the same has been stressed in other posts on SO.
What am i missing here?
Full code:
AppRoleAssignment appRoleAssignment = new AppRoleAssignment()
{
Id = new Guid(),
ResourceId = Guid.Parse(servicePrincipal.ObjectId),
PrincipalId = Guid.Parse(user.ObjectId),
PrincipalType = "User"
};
user.AppRoleAssignments.Add(appRoleAssignment);
await user.UpdateAsync();
Based on my experience, there are two scenarios we may get this issue.
First, if there is customize roles in the service principal you want to assign the default role.
Second, if we have already assigned the default role to that person before.
Please check whether you are in one of these two scenarios and let me know if you still have the problem about this issue.
I'm trying to setup my own Zend_Session_SaveHandler based on this code
http://blog.digitalstruct.com/2010/10/24/zend-framework-cache-backend-libmemcached-session-cache/
This works great, except that my session_id behave mysteriously.
I'm using the Zend_Session_SaveHandler_Cache class as you can find it in the blog above (except that I parked it in my own library, so it's name now starts with My_).
In my bootstrap I have:
protected function _initSession()
{
$session = $this->getPluginResource('session');
$session->init();
Zend_Session::getSaveHandler()->setCache( $this->_manager->getCache( 'memcached' ) );
}
To get my session going based on this code in my .ini file
resources.cachemanager.memcached.frontend.name = Core
resources.cachemanager.memcached.frontend.options.automatic_serialization = On
resources.cachemanager.memcached.backend.name = Libmemcached
resources.cachemanager.memcached.backend.options.servers.one.host = localhost
resources.cachemanager.memcached.backend.options.servers.one.port = 11213
So far so good. Until somebody tries to login and Zend_Session::rememberMe() is called. In the comments of Zend_Session one can read
normally "rememberMe()" represents a security context change, so
should use new session id
This of course is very true, and a new session id is generated. The users Zend_Auth data, after a successful log in, is written into this new session. I can see this because I added some logging functionality to the original class from the blog.
And here is where things go wrong. This new id isn't passed on the Zend_Session apparently, because Zend_Session keeps on reading the old id's session data. In other words, the one without the Zend_Auth instance. Hence, the user can no longer log in.
So the question is, how to make my saveHandler work with the new id after the regeneration?
Cheers for any help.
Ok, I'm blushing here....
I was looking at the wrong place to find this error. My session saveHandler was working just fine (so I can recommend Mike Willbanks his work if you want libmemcached session management).
What did go wrong then? Well, besides switching from file to libmemcached, I also switched from setting up my session in bootstrap to setting it up in my application.ini. So, instead of putting lines like
session.cookie_domain = mydomain.com
in my application.ini (which were then used in bootstrap as options to setup my session), I now, properly, wrote
resources.session.cookie_domain = mydomain.com
And this is were things went wrong, because.... I only changed those lines for production, I forgot to change them further down the ini file. In other words, my development env. got the cookie_domain of my production env., which is wrong as I use an other domain name during devolepment. So, on every page load, my cookie was invalidaded and a new session started. Mysterie solved...
I want to customize Surf Platform Root-Scoped API specifically user object. That means add new property or method to user object to check the user is in certain group in header.inc.ftl [in share] like `<#if user.isAdmin>
How can I implement this?
Is Alfresco Root Scoped Objects can be used as Surf Platform Root-Scoped object?
I have no idea of customizing surf platform root object. Can anyone help me???
Not quite sure what you are trying to accomplish, but the role security model is hardcoded in spring-surf/spring webscripts. There is guest, user and admin. If what you want is another analogous role you'll have to hack the spring-surf libaries, namely:
org/springframework/extensions/surf/mvc/PageView.java
org/springframework/extensions/webscripts/ScriptUser.java
org/springframework/extensions/webscripts/Description.java
org/springframework/extensions/webscripts/connector/User.java
This is what I had to do to implement user.isEmployee. This approach allows you to literally treat your new role just as the others.
you can use
<authentication>employee</authentication>
in page descriptors or
<item type="link" permission="employee" id="people">/people-finder</item>
on the navigation.
Just checking whether the user is in a certain group in a certain webscript is a whole diffrent story and does not provide the same functionality.
If what you want is the latter, you should make a call to
/alfresco/service/api/groups/{shortName}
miss
and works through the response.
Update: The item permission attribute requires a little more tweaking.
In header.get.js, propagate the new role to it gets processed properly in header.inc.ftl:
model.permissions =
{
guest: user.isGuest,
admin: user.isAdmin,
employee : user.isEmployee
};
you could try (in JavaScript I managed something like) this:
user = Application.getCurrentUser(context);
String userName = user.getUserName();
user.isAdmin() >>> result return true if user logining is admin
or in JSP:
#{NavigationBean.currentUser.admin == true}
Sorry, i noticed now you was talking about Surf Platform root objects, but the link you put there, is deprecated for Alfresco versions above 3.3. You still use something so old?
If you manage to use JavaScript API's you could use "person" root object, with boolean isAdmin().
I am creating a plugin for Microsoft Dynamics CRM 4 that will change the owner of the account entity according to the value of another lookup field. Now I have managed to get the GUID of the user that will be acting as the 'Owner' of the account. So far so good.
The problem arises when I try to change the owner. I am trying to use AssignRequest but it is not working. When I try to execute the request I get a SoapException on the C# Debugger, and the webservice outputs a dialog stating:
"The requested record was not found or you do not have sufficient permissions to view it"
Below is the code I am using:
TargetOwnedAccount target = new TargetOwnedAccount();
SecurityPrincipal assignee = new SecurityPrincipal();
assignee.Type = SecurityPrincipalType.User;
assignee.PrincipalId = context.InitiatingUserId;
target.EntityId = ownerGuid; //this is the GUID I am retrieving from the other lookup field
AssignRequest assign = new AssignRequest();
assign.Assignee = assignee;
assign.Target = target;
AssignResponse res = (AssignResponse)crmService.Execute(assign); //this is where i get the exception
I hope I haven't missed anything.
Any help would be much appreciated :)
Thanks
Ok i managed to solve this finally. It had been staring directly at my face :P
I was entering the wrong ID's at the wrong place. I needed to set the 'assignee.PrincipalId' to the 'ownerGuid' and then set the 'target.EntityId' to the current account id. The new code is as follows:
TargetOwnedAccount target = new TargetOwnedAccount();
SecurityPrincipal assignee = new SecurityPrincipal();
assignee.Type = SecurityPrincipalType.User;
assignee.PrincipalId = ownerGuid; //this is the GUID I am retrieving from the other lookup field
target.EntityId = ((Key)entity.Properties["accountid"]).Value;
AssignRequest assign = new AssignRequest();
assign.Assignee = assignee;
assign.Target = target;
AssignResponse res = (AssignResponse)crmService.Execute(assign);
Cant believe i spent 8 hours yesterday looking at it and then today I realised immediately :P
When we are sending the airbrake error to the airbrake server, by default it includes the controller name and action name.
But the question is that I want to add some extra parameters like username, email of the current user. If anyone has any idea please suggest how to do that?
In my layout application.html:
- if ['development'].include?(Rails.env)
= airbrake_javascript_notifier
= render :partial => 'layouts/airbrake_notifier'
and in the partial I have written:
Airbrake.errorDefaults['name'] = "#{current_user.name}";<br/>
Airbrake.errorDefaults['email'] = "#{current_user.email}";<br/>
Airbrake.errorDefaults['phone'] = "#{current_user.phone}";<br/>
Airbrake.errorDefaults['title'] = "#{current_user.title;<br/>
Not a great solution, but the Airbrake Knowledge Base recommends essentially patching the airbrake gem source of the lib/airbrake/notice.rb file.
def initialize(args)
...
self.parameters = args[:parameters] ||
action_dispatch_params ||
rack_env(:params) ||
{'username' => current_user.name}
It would certainly be better to have this be configurable without patching source.
What I've done instead is simply add a few pieces of data to the session (current_user.name mainly), since session data is sent with the request. I wouldn't do this for more than a few little pieces of data.
We've just added getting current users into the Airbrake Gem.
https://github.com/airbrake/airbrake/wiki/Sending-current-user-information
You'll soon be able to sort by current user in an upcoming redesign of the UI.