3 ms·
Absolutely, having P99 of sub-ms is of course way more attractive than 25ms - with a SaaS offering you always have the network latency to the provider in the pa
by aeneas_ory 3y ago
Absolutely, having P99 of sub-ms is of course way more attractive than 25ms - with a SaaS offering you always have the network latency to the provider in the path, which is why multi region capabilities are so important for this case. But you’ll never beat systems where the decision can be made locally.
Have you any documentation on your approach publicly available? I‘d love to get some education and insights from other large scale authz systems! We have a couple of ideas such as running a local replica in our customer’s stack but nothing concrete yet.
- leoqa 3y agoIt’s quite similar mechanically to this blog post about Uber’s policy framework: https://www.uber.com/blog/attribute-based-access-control-at-uber/ https://www.uber.com/blog/attribute-based-access-control-at-.... We have an additional scaling dimension though, as our permission model is richer and mutable by end users, therefore our policies are not uniform. For special hot-path services, we use symmetric keys to reduce latency further but that makes rotations complicated.
- aeneas_ory 3y agoAwesome, thank you for following up! Will give this a read before bed. Would love to understand the encryption pieces, as I very much get the need for frequent updates of permissions (typically append, only sometimes remove). If you ever happen to blog about it please let me know :)