permission | 一款带ui基于RBAC模型的可自由配置的原生的权限框架

Try with Context.MODE_APPEND or Context.MODE_PRIVATE instead of Activity.MODE_WORLD_WRITEABLE

There is a difference between a file and a file descriptor (FD).

All processes share the same files. They don't necessarily have access to the same files, and a file is not its name, either; two different processes which open the same name might not actually open the same file, for example if the first file were renamed or unlinked and a new file were associated with the name. But if they do open the same file, it's necessarily shared, and changes will be mutually visible.

But a file descriptor is not a file. It refers to a file (not a filename, see above), but it also contains other information, including a file position used for and updated by calls to read and write. (You can use "positioned" read and write, pread and pwrite, if you don't want to use the position in the FD.) File descriptors are shared between parent and child processes, and so the file position in the FD is also shared.

Another thing stored in the file descriptor (in the kernel, where user processes can't get at it) is the list of permitted actions (on Unix, read, write, and/or execute, and possibly others). Permissions are stored in the file directory, not in the file itself, and the requested permissions are copied into the file descriptor when the file is opened (if the permissions are available.) It's possible for a child process to have a different user or group than the parent, particularly if the parent is started with augmented permissions but drops them before spawning the child. A file descriptor for a file opened in this manner still has the same permissions uf it is shared with a child, even if the child would itself be able to open the file.

The error messages states that the service account does not have the permission compute.disks.list.

What permissions does the role roles/resourcemanager.organizationViewer have?

Just add them to an array and check if the current author's ID is in that array:

The problem is your INSERT/UPDATE statements. Unless you define those values as an nvarchar then the characters outside the databases collation will be lost. This means you need to declare your parameters as an nvarchar. As a result I would suggest, instead, not changing the collation of the columns and changing them as an nvarchar and using an nvarchars throughout your code.

This issue was solved by Shiva's comment, add it as the answer to close the question:

Some apps call Microsoft Graph using their own identity and not on behalf of a user. For example, the Mail.Read application permission allows apps to read mail in all mailboxes without a signed-in user.

Configuring ApplicationAccessPolicy is used to limit the app access to a specific set of mailboxes.

1.Connect to Exchange Online PowerShell

The Git configuration of user.name and user.email has nothing to do with the permission error. You can specify any email and username. Those two values goes only into the commit author information.

The real issue that you are facing is that you need two different github accounts. Your machine caches the first github account and uses that one to authenticate against the repository where the cached credentials does not have access permissions.

There are two possible solutions to face this issue:

• Use SSH keys and clone the repositories using ssh
• Grant the other account access to the non working repository

I would prefer the first one.

The solution lies in the federated identity pool's settings.

By default the identity pool will provide the IAM role that it's configured with. In other words, one of either the "unauthenticated role" or the "authenticated role" that it's set up with.

But it can be told instead to provide a role specified by the authentication provider. That's what will solve the problem here.

1. In the AWS console, in Cognito, open the relevant identity pool.
2. Click "Edit identity pool" (top right)
3. Expand "Authentication Providers"
4. Under Authenticated Role Selection, choose "Choose role from token".

That will allow Cognito to specify its own roles, and you will find that the users get the privileges of their group.

When you use the Spring Framework, there is a serialization/deserialization happening "behind the scenes" which involves your POJOs.

For example, into this endpoint: