auth_key as argument to publish about python

[mpvader]

Hi, I had the same issue. Our solution was to instantiate a Pubnub() object for each auth-key. I think you will find that this behaviour is the same for all Pubnub APIs, so simply changing the Python one will be confusing, since it then differs from the JS one etc.

But that is up to the Pubnub guys to answer :).

[parasyte]

The recommended use for auth_key is that it is tied to a specific user. The same auth_key can be applied to multiple channels via the grant API. Think of it as a session token, and that token binds permissions to private resources (eg the channels).

Does it make sense?

[mpvader]

Sorry, my previous message is confusing. We have the same issue for the cypher parameter. Not the auth-key that belongs to the grant API. We use the cypher and some other things to achieve more or less the same functionality as the grant API can bring. But chose not to use that API for some other reasons pertaining to our setup.

For us it would have been handy to pass the auth key to Pubnub.subscribe(). But they way we do it now also works fine.

[doc-hex]

To: @parasyte

Sure, that's what I'm doing. Still need my server to write to specific clients, and there cannot be a "write" auth key enabled on the channel or else all the privacy breaks. At first, I had a "master" auth_key with write, but the mere existence of that, combined with the unusual pubnub security model meant all users could read from all channels.

[geremyCohen]

Thanks for the feedback guys. If there is anything we can add to the SDK to make things smoother for you that you think others can also benefit from, please shoot us an email to [email protected], and we'll see about prioritizing it in a release for you.