Book a Demo

Author Topic: Security Problems  (Read 6311 times)

Karina Z.

  • EA Novice
  • *
  • Posts: 2
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Security Problems
« on: June 12, 2008, 06:46:28 am »
Hello,

I'm trying to use the Project.ImportDirectory method. I was able to execute that method without any problems, and to import from code to the model. But, for security requirements in my current project, I would like to avoid that source code from method bodies can be imported too.

I would like to do that, i.e., not import code from method bodies, even if the option "Include method bodies in model hen reverse engineering" is enabled.

I want to avoid that source code can be stored in EA database in any circumstance.

How can I do that ?

Regards,
Karina.

Eve

  • EA Administrator
  • EA Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 8110
  • Karma: +119/-20
    • View Profile
Re: Security Problems
« Reply #1 on: June 12, 2008, 08:28:44 am »
There isn't (currently) any way for for the automation function to override this option.

  • You can either ensure that no-one turns the option on.


OR

  • You can write into your automation client something that clears the code property for all methods.


OR

  • You can write a sql call do do the same thing.

«Midnight»

  • EA Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 5651
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • That nice Mister Grey
    • View Profile
Re: Security Problems
« Reply #2 on: June 12, 2008, 08:58:12 am »
[edit]Ignore this post, and see above. Simon's post came in while I was writing this.

I am leaving the post as (yet another) indicator of how to contact Sparx for this kind of thing.[/edit]
Hi Karina,

This one is tricky. As written it does not look like you can do this.

However...

The way the documentation reads, it definitely looks like Sparx intended to extend the function to allow other options. These would almost certainly parallel those in the GUI dialog, which is what you want. Ideally, one of these would control the Include Method Bodies setting, overriding the default behavior and any user settings.

This kind of thing - having a set of options that affect only the current method call - is a pattern that Sparx has used several times in the API.

The wording of the documentation is very interesting. It suggests that the only "currently" available option is recursing directories. It then provides the syntax as an "example," suggesting this is only one of (hopefully several) options. To make this even more interesting, the documentation of this method has not changed in some time.

Perhaps the method has evolved to accept additional options, and the documentation is lagging. Even if it has you still need to know the syntax.

My suggestion is to immediately write to Sparx support asking if this is the case. In case it is, remind them to update the documentation, and remember to post back here to let us know what they tell you about how to use the new options.

If this has not yet happened, file a feature request. Use the link near the bottom of any forum page (beneath the Support link) to get to the correct form for this. If you do file the suggestion, please post back to let us know that this function has not been updated.

HTH, David
« Last Edit: June 12, 2008, 08:59:42 am by Midnight »
No, you can't have it!

Eve

  • EA Administrator
  • EA Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 8110
  • Karma: +119/-20
    • View Profile
Re: Security Problems
« Reply #3 on: June 12, 2008, 02:12:03 pm »
David is right about one thing.

You can't go wrong with a feature request.  The function has the extra options there so that it can be extended to take more options without breaking existing callers.

Karina Z.

  • EA Novice
  • *
  • Posts: 2
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Security Problems
« Reply #4 on: June 13, 2008, 06:59:26 am »
Hello again,

Thanks a lot for all help. I will try to use the sql suggestion. I will create triggers for update and insert events.

I will let you know if it works.

Regards,
Karina.