| name | enterprise-rbac-models |
| description | Enterprise RBAC (Role-Based Access Control) provides a scalable, auditable, Use when this capability is needed. |
| metadata | {"author":"amnadtaowsoam"} |
Enterprise Rbac Models
Skill Profile
(Select at least one profile to enable specific modules)
Overview
Enterprise RBAC (Role-Based Access Control) provides a scalable, auditable, and secure approach to managing user permissions through role-based assignments. This skill covers implementing hierarchical roles, custom permissions, multi-level access control (organization, project, resource), and integration with SSO for enterprise applications.
Why This Matters
- Scalability: Manage thousands of users with role-based assignments instead of individual permissions
- Security Compliance: Meet enterprise security requirements (SOC2, ISO 27001) with audit trails and least privilege
- Operational Efficiency: Automate onboarding/offboarding through role assignments and SSO integration
- Flexibility: Support custom roles, hierarchical inheritance, and multi-level access control
Core Concepts & Rules
1. Core Principles
- Follow established patterns and conventions
- Maintain consistency across codebase
- Document decisions and trade-offs
2. Implementation Guidelines
- Start with the simplest viable solution
- Iterate based on feedback and requirements
- Test thoroughly before deployment
Inputs / Outputs / Contracts
- Inputs:
- User identity (email, user ID)
- SSO assertion (groups, attributes)
- Role assignment requests
- Permission check requests (userId, permission, resourceId)
- Entry Conditions:
- Database initialized with users, roles, permissions tables
- Authentication system implemented (SSO or local)
- Role hierarchy defined
- Outputs:
- Permission check result (true/false)
- User roles and permissions
- Audit logs for role changes and access attempts
- Access review reports
- Artifacts Required (Deliverables):
- Database schema (users, roles, permissions, user_roles, role_permissions)
- Permission checking middleware
- Role management API endpoints
- UI components for conditional rendering
- Audit logging implementation
- Acceptance Evidence:
- Test suite covering all roles and permissions
- API endpoint permission enforcement tests
- UI component visibility tests
- Audit log verification
- Success Criteria:
- All API endpoints properly enforce permissions
- UI correctly shows/hides elements based on permissions
- Role inheritance works correctly
- SSO group-to-role mapping functions
- Audit logs capture all permission changes
Skill Composition
- Depends on: Authentication (SSO, SAML, OIDC), Database Design
- Compatible with: SCIM Provisioning, Security Questionnaires, Vendor Onboarding
- Conflicts with: None
- Related Skills: SSO (SAML & OIDC), SCIM Provisioning
Quick Start / Implementation Example
- Review requirements and constraints
- Set up development environment
- Implement core functionality following patterns
- Write tests for critical paths
- Run tests and fix issues
- Document any deviations or decisions
def example_function():
pass
Assumptions / Constraints / Non-goals
- Assumptions:
- Development environment is properly configured
- Required dependencies are available
- Team has basic understanding of domain
- Constraints:
- Must follow existing codebase conventions
- Time and resource limitations
- Compatibility requirements
- Non-goals:
- This skill does not cover edge cases outside scope
- Not a replacement for formal training
Compatibility & Prerequisites
- Supported Versions:
- Python 3.8+
- Node.js 16+
- Modern browsers (Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Edge)
- Required AI Tools:
- Code editor (VS Code recommended)
- Testing framework appropriate for language
- Version control (Git)
- Dependencies:
- Language-specific package manager
- Build tools
- Testing libraries
- Environment Setup:
.env.example keys: API_KEY, DATABASE_URL (no values)
Test Scenario Matrix (QA Strategy)
| Type | Focus Area | Required Scenarios / Mocks |
|---|
| Unit | Core Logic | Must cover primary logic and at least 3 edge/error cases. Target minimum 80% coverage |
| Integration | DB / API | All external API calls or database connections must be mocked during unit tests |
| E2E | User Journey | Critical user flows to test |
| Performance | Latency / Load | Benchmark requirements |
| Security | Vuln / Auth | SAST/DAST or dependency audit |
| Frontend | UX / A11y | Accessibility checklist (WCAG), Performance Budget (Lighthouse score) |
Technical Guardrails & Security Threat Model
1. Security & Privacy (Threat Model)
- Top Threats: Injection attacks, authentication bypass, data exposure
2. Performance & Resources
3. Architecture & Scalability
4. Observability & Reliability
Agent Directives & Error Recovery
(ข้อกำหนดสำหรับ AI Agent ในการคิดและแก้ปัญหาเมื่อเกิดข้อผิดพลาด)
- Thinking Process: Analyze root cause before fixing. Do not brute-force.
- Fallback Strategy: Stop after 3 failed test attempts. Output root cause and ask for human intervention/clarification.
- Self-Review: Check against Guardrails & Anti-patterns before finalizing.
- Output Constraints: Output ONLY the modified code block. Do not explain unless asked.
Definition of Done (DoD) Checklist
Anti-patterns / Pitfalls
- ⛔ Don't: Log PII, catch-all exception, N+1 queries
- ⚠️ Watch out for: Common symptoms and quick fixes
- 💡 Instead: Use proper error handling, pagination, and logging
Reference Links & Examples
- Internal documentation and examples
- Official documentation and best practices
- Community resources and discussions
Versioning & Changelog
- Version: 1.0.0
- Changelog:
- 2026-02-22: Initial version with complete template structure
Converted and distributed by TomeVault — claim your Tome and manage your conversions.