Moat is a minimalist authorization library for Ruby web applications, inspired by Pundit. It is used today in production by Poll Everywhere and has been praised for its auditability and testability by security audit firms.
Moat features:
- Scope-first approach to resource authorization
- Fail-safe runtime assertions in the controller throw an exception if a Moat does not authorize a resource during a request
- RSpec matchers that make testing easy and fun for engineers, auditable by security auditing firms, and readable by non-technical people
- Plain' ol' Ruby objects (PORO) for better extensibility and to be more understandable to Ruby developers who have to dig into the guts of Moat
- No runtime dependencies keeps bundle installs snappy and working well outside of Rails projects
First, Pundit is awesome. We wrote this comparison to help us better understand if we should use Pundit or build this library. We found the differences compelling enough to build Moat, and maybe you too.
They are similar libraries, with an important distinction: Pundit is centered around authorizing individual resources, while Moat encourages filtering collections instead. The reasons for this are described below.
If you are working with a collection (index actions, bulk actions, nested attributes, etc.), authorizing one object at a time can easily lead to N+1 performance problems. Pundit does have scopes, but only one per policy. This is not sufficient for authorizing multiple types of actions that involve collections.
Using scopes allows authorization to be applied before the sensitive data is loaded from the database. This is consistent with the Brakeman recommendation to not use an Unscoped Find, also known as Direct Object Reference.
# Security risk: variable is populated with unauthorized data
@thing = Thing.find_by!(id: params[:id])
authorize(@thing)
# More secure: data is never loaded from the database
@thing = policy_filter(Thing).find_by!(id: params[:id])
Pundit has a runtime dependency on ActiveSupport, which can add a lot of heft to projects that don't use Rails.
Moat has 0 runtime dependencies making it a tad lighter weight when used with Sinatra or any other non-Rails environments.
gem "moat"
Include Moat in your application controller:
class ApplicationController < ActionController::Base
include Moat
after_action :verify_policy_applied
end
Moat borrows from Pundit the concept that all authorization is done through policy classes: plain-ole-ruby-objects (POROs) that follow certain conventions:
- The name of the policy class is typically the name of a model class with the suffix "Policy". For example,
FooPolicy
contains the authorization rules forFoo
models. - Within its namespace, a policy can contain
Filter
andAuthorization
classes to filter collections and invidual resources, respectively. - Public methods for
Authorization
classes should end in?
. - Public methods for
Filter
classes typically match the name of the Rails controller action.
class ArticlePolicy < ApplicationPolicy
class Filter < Filter
def initialize(user, scope)
@user = user
@scope = scope
end
def update
if !user
scope.none
elsif user.admin?
scope.all
else
scope.where(user_id: user.id)
end
end
private
attr_reader :user, :scope
end
class Authorization < Authorization
def initialize(user, resource)
@user = user
@resource = resource
end
def create?
user
end
private
attr_reader :user, :resource
end
end
class ApplicationController < ActionController::Base
include Moat
after_action :verify_policy_applied
end
class ArticlesController < ApplicationController
before_action :load_article, only: [:update]
def create
authorize(Article)
@article = current_user.articles.create!(article_params)
end
def update
@article.update!(article_params)
end
private
def load_article
@article = policy_filter(Article).find_by!(id: params[:id])
end
def article_params
params.require(:article).permit(:title, :body)
end
end
policy_filter(scope, action = action_name, user: moat_user, policy: <optional>)
- Called from controller actions or
before_action
s - Returns a
scope
with limitations according topolicy
- Automagically tries to determine
policy
andaction
if not given
authorize(resource, action = action_name, user: moat_user, policy: <optional>)
- Called in controller methods
- Raises
Moat::NotAuthorizedError
ifuser
is not permitted to takeaction
on the resource according topolicy
- Automagically tries to determine
policy
andaction
if not given
authorized?(resource, action = action_name, user: moat_user, policy: <optional>)
- Called in controller methods
- Returns
true
ifuser
is permitted to takeaction
on the resource according topolicy
, otherwise it returnsfalse
- Automagically tries to determine
policy
andaction
if not given
moat_user
- Returns
current_user
unless overridden
verify_policy_applied
- For use as
after_action
- Raises
Moat::PolicyNotAppliedError
unlessauthorize
orpolicy_filter
has been called - Using this is highly recommended as a fail safe. However, it is not a replacement for good tests. Sometimes a controller action will need to authorize multiple scopes or resources. This verifies that a policy was applied at least once. It does not verify that a policy was applied to every resource referenced in your controller action.
skip_verify_policy_applied
- Called from controller actions
- Prevents
verify_policy_applied
from raising - This removes an important fail-safe
- Never use this without making it super clear to future developers why it is safe to call this method
A Moat policy
is a PORO that is initialized with a user and a scope
- Moat policies live in
app/policies
and are named after a resource suffixed withPolicy
- Example:
AccountPolicy
represents the authorization logic for anAccount
and lives inapp/policies/account_policy.rb
A scope
is an Enumerable object representing a set of resources
- In a Rails app, this is almost always an
ActiveRecord::Relation
- If you are not using an
ActiveRecord::Relation
you should document your policy very clearly. Properly using the interface between your policies and your controllers is essential for maintaining security.
Action methods for Filter
classes should not end with ?
. If the user is not authorized for anything, then an empty collection/scope should be returned. Otherwise they should return a scope limited to the records the user has access to for the corresponding action.
Example: AccountPolicy#update
should return the scope of all accounts the user has permission to update.
Action methods for Authorization
classes should end with ?
. If the return value is true
(truthy) then the user is authorized to take the specified action on the resource.
Moat policy methods that do not end in ?
Example: AccountPolicy#update?
should return true
only if a user is an administrator in the account.
require "moat/rspec"
describe ThingPolicy do
resource { Thing.create(owner: resource_owner) }
policy_filters :index, :show, :edit, :update
policy_authorizations :create?, :view_metadata?
let(:superuser) { User.create(superuser: true) }
let(:anonymous_user) { nil }
let(:resource_owner) { User.create }
let(:account_sibling) { User.create(account_id: resource_owner.account_id) }
let(:non_account_sibling) { User.create }
roles :superuser, :resource_owner do
it { is_expected.to permit_through_all_filters }
it { is_expected.to permit_all_authorizations }
end
role :account_sibling do
it { is_expected.to only_permit_through_filters(:index, :show) }
it { is_expected.to only_permit_authorizations(:create?) }
end
role :non_account_sibling do
it { is_expected.to deny_through_all_filters }
it { is_expected.to only_permit_authorizations(:create?) }
end
role :anonymous_user do
it { is_expected.to deny_through_all_filters }
it { is_expected.to deny_all_authorizations }
end
end
If a non-standard scope is required for filters, it can be overridden. It defaults to the all
relation for ActiveRecord models or a simple Array otherwise.
scope { resource.container }
The current role can be referenced with current_role
, or role
for just the role name as a symbol.
When using context
or description
in combination with roles
, we recommend that roles
be the outermost nesting level. We've found that most of the time it's easier to maintain in the long term.
# spec/support/policy.rb
module PolicyRSpecHelpers
def self.included(base_class)
base_class.class_eval do
# also a convenient place to define roles to be shared across policy specs
let(:superuser) { User.create(superuser: true) }
let(:anonymous_user) { nil }
describe "spec/support/policy helper tests" do
it "tests all defined filters" do
public_methods = described_class::Filter.instance_methods(false)
filters = begin
policy_filters
rescue NotImplementedError
[]
end
expect(filters).to match_array(public_methods)
end
it "tests all defined authorizations" do
public_methods = described_class::Authorization.instance_methods(false)
authorizations = begin
policy_authorizations
rescue NotImplementedError
[]
end
expect(authorizations).to match_array(public_methods)
end
end
end
end
end
RSpec.configure do |config|
config.include(
PolicyRSpecHelpers,
type: :policy,
file_path: %r{spec/policies}
)
end
-
The controller should handle filters motivated by the user's preferences, UI concerns; and performance concerns.
-
The Policy should only handle filters required by authorization rules.
-
It is OK if the controller and the Policy duplicate a
where
orincludes
. ActiveRecord and most database engines are good de-duplicate this. -
The Policy
Filter
methods should add allincludes
andwhere
clauses it needs itself. It should not make assumptions about how the argument is already scoped. -
Be careful about your database indices. The actual SQL that is executed will depend on both the controller and policy code. For example, the following code would require a compound index on both subject_id and user_id.
# Controller def index @articles = policy_filter(Article.where(subject_id: params[:subject_id])) end # Policy def index scope.where(user_id: user.id) end
-
Use scopes (filters) when possible. But don't be afraid of authorizations when they make the code simpler.
-
Avoid making database queries in action methods in an
Authorize
class. The caller should eager load everything the policies needs to evaluate permissions. This helps to avoid N+1 performance problems if you need to check the permissions of multiple records. -
Be careful with before_action/after_action/around_action. Rails makes it easy to share these with multiple controller actions. By default Moat implies the policy method from the controller action. When you use Moat via
authorize
orpolicy_filter
be sure to test the behavior with every controller action that uses that before_action method.Mistake 1: Failing to define a policy action that is implicitly used.
class ThingsController < ApplicationController before_action :load_thing def show end def update @thing.update!(params.permit(:name)) end private def load_things @thing = policy_filter(Thing).find(params[:id]) end end class ThingPolicy < ApplicationPolicy class Filter < Filter def show scope.where(account_id: user.account_id) end # Oops. Forgot to add an `update` policy method. end end
Mistake 2: Sharing the permission in a shared before_action, thus allowing access that should be denied.
class ThingsController < ApplicationController before_action :load_thing def show end def update @thing.update!(params.permit(:name)) end private def load_things # Oops! `show` permissions are being used for `update` action @thing = policy_filter(Thing, :show).find(params[:id]) end end class ThingPolicy < ApplicationPolicy class Filter < Filter def show scope.where(account_id: user.account_id) end def update scope.where(user_id: user.id) end end end
-
Use well-factored, clear names.
# OK because it is a simple case class ThingPolicy class Filter def show scope.where(user_id: user.id) end def update scope.where(account_id: user.account_id) end end end # Better because the filtering logic is labeled. class ThingPolicy class Filter def show accounts_things end def update (admin? && account_things) || users_things end private def users_things scope.where(user_id: user.id) end def accounts_things scope.where(account_id: user.account_id) end end end
-
Do authorization in controllers. If you are using background jobs, service objects, or presenters, authorize all the user input in the controller before passing responsibility to these other classes. This gives you a consistent place to verify whether or not you have implemented proper authorization.