Casbin vs LDAP

Overview

Casbin

Stacks39

Followers78

Votes0

GitHub Stars19.4K

Forks1.7K

LDAP

Stacks76

Followers70

Votes0

Casbin vs LDAP: What are the differences?

Introduction:

Casbin and LDAP are both access control solutions used in web applications, but they have key differences in their functionalities and implementation.

Data Model: Casbin uses a flexible access control model that includes subjects (users or application identities), objects (the resource being accessed), and actions (operations performed on objects). LDAP, on the other hand, is a protocol used to access and manage directory information, primarily for authentication and authorization purposes.
Granularity of Control: Casbin provides a fine-grained access control mechanism where permissions can be defined at a very detailed level, allowing for precise access control down to the individual user or group level. LDAP, however, typically operates at a coarser level, often providing access control based on roles or groups.
Implementation: Casbin is a library that can be integrated into an application to provide access control capabilities, offering a programmatic approach to defining and managing access policies. LDAP, on the other hand, is a protocol that defines how clients can access directory services, and it is often used in combination with other tools for authentication and authorization.
Scalability: LDAP is designed to be highly scalable, capable of managing large directories with millions of entries efficiently. Casbin, while scalable in its own right, may require additional configuration or integration with other services to handle the same level of scalability as LDAP.
Authentication vs. Authorization: LDAP primarily focuses on authentication, verifying the identity of users, and potentially sharing information like group memberships. Casbin, on the other hand, is focused on authorization, determining what actions users are allowed to perform within an application based on defined policies.
Ease of Use: Casbin is designed to be developer-friendly, with a simple API for defining access control rules and policies within an application. LDAP, while powerful, may have a steeper learning curve due to its complexity and the need to understand directory structures and schemas.

In Summary, Casbin and LDAP differ in their data models, granularity of control, implementation methods, scalability, focus on authentication versus authorization, and ease of use for developers.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs

CLI (Node.js)

Manual

Detailed Comparison

Casbin	LDAP
In Casbin, an access control model is abstracted into a CONF file based on the PERM metamodel (Policy, Effect, Request, Matchers). So switching or upgrading the authorization mechanism for a project is just as simple as modifying a configuration. You can customize your own access control model by combining the available models.	It is a mature, flexible, and well supported standards-based mechanism for interacting with directory servers. It’s often used for authentication and storing information about users, groups, and applications, but an LDAP directory server is a fairly general-purpose data store and can be used in a wide variety of applications.
-	Lightweight directory access protocol; Used for authentication and storing information; General-purpose data store
Statistics
GitHub Stars 19.4K	GitHub Stars -
GitHub Forks 1.7K	GitHub Forks -
Stacks 39	Stacks 76
Followers 78	Followers 70
Votes 0	Votes 0

What are some alternatives to Casbin, LDAP?

Auth0

A set of unified APIs and tools that instantly enables Single Sign On and user management to all your applications.

Stormpath

Stormpath is an authentication and user management service that helps development teams quickly and securely build web and mobile applications and services.

Keycloak

It is an Open Source Identity and Access Management For Modern Applications and Services. It adds authentication to applications and secure services with minimum fuss. No need to deal with storing users or authenticating users. It's all available out of the box.

Devise

Devise is a flexible authentication solution for Rails based on Warden

Firebase Authentication

It provides backend services, easy-to-use SDKs, and ready-made UI libraries to authenticate users to your app. It supports authentication using passwords, phone numbers, popular federated identity providers like Google,

Amazon Cognito

You can create unique identities for your users through a number of public login providers (Amazon, Facebook, and Google) and also support unauthenticated guests. You can save app data locally on users’ devices allowing your applications to work even when the devices are offline.

WorkOS

Start selling to enterprise customers with just a few lines of code.

OAuth.io

OAuth is a protocol that aimed to provide a single secure recipe to manage authorizations. It is now used by almost every web application. However, 30+ different implementations coexist. OAuth.io fixes this massive problem by acting as a universal adapter, thanks to a robust API. With OAuth.io integrating OAuth takes minutes instead of hours or days.

OmniAuth

OmniAuth is a Ruby authentication framework aimed to abstract away the difficulties of working with various types of authentication providers. It is meant to be hooked up to just about any system, from social networks to enterprise systems to simple username and password authentication.

ORY Hydra

It is a self-managed server that secures access to your applications and APIs with OAuth 2.0 and OpenID Connect. It is OpenID Connect Certified and optimized for latency, high throughput, and low resource consumption.

Related Comparisons

Postman vs Swagger UI

Google Maps vs Mapbox

Leaflet vs Mapbox vs OpenLayers

Mailgun vs Mandrill vs SendGrid

Paw vs Postman vs Runscope

Casbin vs LDAP: What are the differences?

Introduction:

Casbin and LDAP are both access control solutions used in web applications, but they have key differences in their functionalities and implementation.

Data Model: Casbin uses a flexible access control model that includes subjects (users or application identities), objects (the resource being accessed), and actions (operations performed on objects). LDAP, on the other hand, is a protocol used to access and manage directory information, primarily for authentication and authorization purposes.
Granularity of Control: Casbin provides a fine-grained access control mechanism where permissions can be defined at a very detailed level, allowing for precise access control down to the individual user or group level. LDAP, however, typically operates at a coarser level, often providing access control based on roles or groups.
Implementation: Casbin is a library that can be integrated into an application to provide access control capabilities, offering a programmatic approach to defining and managing access policies. LDAP, on the other hand, is a protocol that defines how clients can access directory services, and it is often used in combination with other tools for authentication and authorization.
Scalability: LDAP is designed to be highly scalable, capable of managing large directories with millions of entries efficiently. Casbin, while scalable in its own right, may require additional configuration or integration with other services to handle the same level of scalability as LDAP.
Authentication vs. Authorization: LDAP primarily focuses on authentication, verifying the identity of users, and potentially sharing information like group memberships. Casbin, on the other hand, is focused on authorization, determining what actions users are allowed to perform within an application based on defined policies.
Ease of Use: Casbin is designed to be developer-friendly, with a simple API for defining access control rules and policies within an application. LDAP, while powerful, may have a steeper learning curve due to its complexity and the need to understand directory structures and schemas.

In Summary, Casbin and LDAP differ in their data models, granularity of control, implementation methods, scalability, focus on authentication versus authorization, and ease of use for developers.