Disabling "enable names" makes admin act strange

[mdoggydog]

@hugh

It looks like your solution here is to replace the enable names setting with one that takes a list of groups, and member’s names are only visible to those groups.

The code I have written does not remove the enable names setting,^[1] but adds to it:

1. Add a full_names_visible_to_groups setting (which includes admins and moderators as mandatory values).
2. Add a can_see_full_names? method to Guardian, which performs an “and” of enable_names and the group membership in full_names_visible_to_groups.
3. Use this new method in all the appropriate places where a full name is exposed/emitted by the server.

1 and 2 were easy. 3 is more complicated, and I know I hit some snags that I was not sure how to resolve without getting advice/guidance. I need to go back and review my code and notes in depth. (It has been 2+ months since I last immersed myself in this. )

@hugh

Note that this would still need to respect the display name on posts setting (and any other similar ones that may exist), so even allowed groups don’t see the name on posts if that setting is disabled.

(If I recall, display name on posts and the like are client-side settings, that affect the presentation of data received from the server. In other words, a restriction on top of whatever the server emits.)

@hugh

1. Names should always be visible in the admin view of a user profile. This will be the case regardless of any settings.
2. Names should only show in emails if the user is in an allowed group.

I believe (1) is taken care of if enable_names is true, which will probably be what almost everyone wants once the new per-group setting is available.^[2]

I think I encountered and dealt with (2) — mostly.^[3]

I recall some other cases where full names are being leaked.^[4]

Anyhow, I will go review notes and try to submit PR’s this week, and dredge up the open-questions/loose-ends in the process.

---

1. …for a number of reasons, among them: (a) I wasn’t sure what the actual intent of the setting is (see my question in an earlier post above), and (b) leaving it in there provides a safer incremental upgrade path. ↩︎

2. …if one takes that stance that enable_names = false means “This site does not use full names in any way.” ↩︎

3. E.g., when an invite email is sent to some address (obviously not associated with a user, otherwise they would need no invite), does the email include the inviter’s full name or not? ↩︎

4. E.g., oneboxer.rb, when oneboxing a local user, writes the full name into the cooked post content, which makes it visible to everyone and anyone, forever. ↩︎