Users, Members and Custom or Integrated Windows Authentication.
I am a little bit unconfortable with having 2 directories in Umbraco: Users and Members (Membership Providers).
I am talking within the context of web application in the Enterprise Environment, not a Public facing website.
Suppose I give one of our users some Rights on a certain Content Node in back-office under "Users" membership providers, so why do I have to define him again in the "Members" membership ? So that he can navigate to a Protected Node from the front-end.
Or maybe I have the wrong understanding of Autehntication and Membership Providers usage in Umbraco ?
I was able to implement Integrate Windows Authentication in Umbraco for "Members" Membership Provider. Now, again, I have to do some work to implement Windows Authentication for "Users" membership provider.
I appreciate it if someone could explain to me the need for 2 separate Membership providers in Umbraco.
I know this is a very old topic, but I just ran across it while Googling trying to use a custom member provider for the back office (which doesn't seem to be very possible unfortunately).
However, because the custom providers for Members have very limited functionality requirements - I've implemented extremely simple ones with no problem at all - it occurs to me that it would probably be possible to solve your problem by using the backoffice providers as the Member providers as well. Then you can manage users in one place, the backoffice users section, and just set up role based access for nodes based on editor etc. roles.
DISCLAIMER I've not tried it, it's just a theory! But it may help someone who has a similar use case.
Users, Members and Custom or Integrated Windows Authentication.
I am a little bit unconfortable with having 2 directories in Umbraco: Users and Members (Membership Providers).
I am talking within the context of web application in the Enterprise Environment, not a Public facing website.
Suppose I give one of our users some Rights on a certain Content Node in back-office under "Users" membership providers, so why do I have to define him again in the "Members" membership ? So that he can navigate to a Protected Node from the front-end.
Or maybe I have the wrong understanding of Autehntication and Membership Providers usage in Umbraco ?
I was able to implement Integrate Windows Authentication in Umbraco for "Members" Membership Provider. Now, again, I have to do some work to implement Windows Authentication for "Users" membership provider.
I appreciate it if someone could explain to me the need for 2 separate Membership providers in Umbraco.
Tarek.
Hi Tarek
Users are only allowed access to the umbraco backoffice.
Members are used to manage member-subscription and access to the frontend site if you're doing a site with a community or something like that.
So the 2 sections don't have anything to do with each other as they serve different purposes.
I hope this helps on your understanding? :-)
/Jan
So my understanding is correct, which is basically:
1. Say user X has been defined in "Users" membership, to be the editor of certain content.
2. If the same user X, need access to protected content then he must be defined again in "Members" membership.
Is my understanding correct ?
Tarek.
Hi Tarek
For number 2: Hmmm....It depends!
If you use canvas he/she can edit the page in the "frontend" and I think that's the best practice to edit the website when you're a user.
If you for some reason don't want to use canvas mode I guess you could create members to make editors edit the website from the frontend.
But in my understanding members should be used when people can access something with a specific member area where they can edit their own details etc.
/Jan
I know this is a very old topic, but I just ran across it while Googling trying to use a custom member provider for the back office (which doesn't seem to be very possible unfortunately).
However, because the custom providers for Members have very limited functionality requirements - I've implemented extremely simple ones with no problem at all - it occurs to me that it would probably be possible to solve your problem by using the backoffice providers as the Member providers as well. Then you can manage users in one place, the backoffice users section, and just set up role based access for nodes based on editor etc. roles.
DISCLAIMER I've not tried it, it's just a theory! But it may help someone who has a similar use case.
Hi Rob,
Thanks ! It seems very smart idea ... why it shouldn't work?
If we can manage to implement this idea, then the confusion will be part of the history.
Tarek.
is working on a reply...