Authorization: Defining What’s Allowed, and for Whom

In today’s software landscape, knowing who someone is isn’t enough — we also need to know what they’re allowed to do. That’s the core of authorization. It ensures users can access what they’re supposed to, and nothing more. It defines the boundaries of action — whether for a customer, a developer, a background service, or an admin dashboard.

Without clear, enforceable authorization, systems become either too permissive (and dangerous) or too restrictive (and frustrating). Done right, authorization quietly powers trust and scale.

---

Why Authorization Matters

Authorization controls the depth and breadth of access. It decides whether a logged-in user can update data, whether a service can pull records, or whether an admin can make structural changes.

In multi-tenant, API-driven, and cloud-native applications, authorization is not optional — it’s foundational. It’s about:

• Protecting sensitive data.

• Enabling role-based access at scale.

• Reducing blast radius when something goes wrong.

It also supports principles like least privilege, zero trust, and privacy by design, which are critical for both user confidence and regulatory compliance.

---

What You’re Responsible For

As part of a development or architecture team, your responsibility is to:

• Design role-based and/or attribute-based access logic that reflects real-world responsibilities.

• Separate authentication from authorization, ensuring each layer has a single, clear purpose.

• Enforce permissions across all access points — APIs, UI, batch jobs, integrations.

• Keep access logic centralized, testable, and auditable. Hardcoding permissions into isolated places leads to drift and risk.

• Fail securely — if permission is unclear or fails to load, access should be denied, not silently granted.

Ultimately, you’re responsible for who can do what, and for making sure that’s enforced every time — without exception.

---

How to Approach It

During Design

• Define roles and access levels early. Build user stories that describe what each role should and shouldn’t be able to do.

• Choose an authorization model that fits the system’s complexity:

  • Role-Based Access Control (RBAC) for clear user types.

  • Attribute-Based Access Control (ABAC) for dynamic conditions.

  • Policy-Based Access Control (PBAC) for governance-driven systems.

• Design APIs and endpoints with explicit permission checks — don’t rely on frontend restrictions.

During Development

• Keep authorization checks server-side and centralized where possible.

• Use middleware or authorization services (like OPA, Casbin, or AWS IAM) to evaluate access consistently.

• Ensure logs capture authorization failures and denials, so they can be audited.

During Testing & QA

• Validate that users cannot access unauthorized paths or data — not just in the UI, but via direct API calls.

• Test for privilege escalation, horizontal access, and misconfigured policies.

• Include negative testing — what happens when someone tries to do something they shouldn’t?

---

What This Leads To

Strong authorization design leads to:

• Trust from users that their data and boundaries are respected.

• Operational safety, where developers and internal users can’t accidentally overstep.

• Scalability, where new roles and use cases can be added without rewriting access logic.

• Compliance readiness, where permissions can be explained and justified during audits.

You’re not just writing rules — you’re shaping how responsibly the system behaves under real-world pressure.

---

How to Easily Remember the Core Idea

Think of your system as a building.

Authentication is the front door key — it proves someone belongs.
Authorization is the keycard that determines which rooms they can enter.

Just because someone is inside doesn’t mean they should have access to the vault. Authorization is what ensures they don’t.

---

How to Identify a System with Inferior Authorization

You’ll notice signs quickly:

• All authenticated users seem to have the same privileges.

• Frontend hides options visually but backend still accepts all actions.

• There’s no way to audit who was allowed to do something — only that they did it.

• Admins or devs have broad, unscoped permissions in production environments.

• You can’t answer “who can access this?” without checking multiple code files manually.

Such systems are vulnerable by default — whether anyone has exploited them yet or not.

---

What a System with Good Authorization Feels Like

From the user’s point of view, it feels safe and smooth.

They can do everything they need — and nothing more. The UI reflects their permissions clearly, and actions are predictable. Errors are informative, not abrupt.

For engineers, it’s low-friction and auditable. New roles can be added without rewriting logic. Policies are tested, centralized, and monitored.

It’s the kind of system where boundaries are respected automatically — not because people remember, but because the system enforces it.

---

The Role of Authorization in Multi-Tenant Systems

In multi-tenant architectures, multiple organizations (or tenants) share the same application — often even the same infrastructure — while expecting logical separation of data and control. Authorization plays a defining role here.

It’s no longer just about what one user can do. It’s about what users within a specific tenant can do in relation to their tenant’s data, shared features, and administrative scopes.

Here, authorization must enforce boundaries on:

• Data visibility: One tenant should never see another’s records — not via UI, API, or logs.

• Feature toggles: Premium or enterprise tenants might have access to more actions.

• Scoped administration: A tenant’s admin can invite and manage their users — but not beyond.

In multi-tenant systems, a bug in authorization is rarely “just a bug” — it’s a breach of contract, and often a security incident.

Robust, testable, and well-structured authorization is what makes one shared platform behave like many isolated systems — safely and at scale.

---

Design Patterns and Best Practices for Authorization

Great authorization isn’t just policy — it’s architecture. It lives in how systems are structured, how responsibilities are separated, and how access rules are enforced over time.

Here’s a concise guide to the most reliable approaches:

Design Patterns That Support Authorization

Best Practices to Implement Secure Authorization

• Centralize policy decisions — don’t scatter if checks across codebases.

• Use context-rich access decisions — pass in user, tenant, resource, and action as part of every check.

• Fail closed, not open — when in doubt, deny access.

• Tag data with ownership metadata — so rules can validate access with clarity (e.g., resource.tenantId == user.tenantId).

• Audit and log denied requests — they often reveal attempted misuse or broken flows.

• Test for horizontal privilege escalation — can one user access another’s data by guessing IDs?

• Version your policies — especially if using external policy engines or ABAC models.

Authorization isn’t a checkbox — it’s a backbone. And in systems that scale across organizations, it’s what allows you to grow without breaking trust.

---

Managing Roles and Permissions: Strategy, Storage, and Stewardship

Defining access is only the beginning — managing it over time is where authorization either flourishes or becomes a liability. Roles and permissions need to evolve as systems grow, user needs shift, or regulations change. How you manage this complexity makes all the difference.

Who Should Manage Roles?

Access rules aren't just technical — they’re organizational policy expressed in code. This means:

• Product owners and security leads define what roles exist and what they should be able to do.

• Engineering teams translate that intent into implementable logic and policy structures.

• Only specific admin roles (or governance tools) should be able to change role definitions — and those changes should be tracked, reviewed, and tested.

Letting anyone change permissions directly in a database or config file without traceability is asking for silent escalation risks.

---

Where to Store Roles and Permissions?

A practical approach balances reliability, auditability, and performance.

A typical pattern: define in DB → load into cache at login → enforce during requests. On role change, invalidate relevant cache keys.

---

Versioning and Evolving Access Logic

Over time, you'll need to:

• Add new roles for emerging user groups.

• Modify existing permissions based on feature changes.

• Deprecate or split legacy roles for tighter control.

To do this safely:

• Treat role and permission definitions like code — versioned, reviewed, and tested.

• Use migrations or flags to transition systems smoothly across permission updates.

• Maintain a change log for roles — who changed what, when, and why. This becomes invaluable during audits or incident reviews.

---

Real-World Example: A Growing SaaS Tool

A small SaaS tool starts with just two roles: admin and user. As it grows to serve larger clients, new needs emerge:

• A billing_admin role for finance teams.

• A support_agent role with read-only access to user issues.

• A viewer role that can only monitor dashboards.

With each new role, the system’s access logic must evolve — without breaking old workflows or creating silent overlaps. That’s where versioning and policy modularity help the team evolve with confidence rather than fear of regressions.

Authorization is never “done.” It’s a living aspect of your architecture — one that demands attention, clarity, and careful change management.

---

Key Terms

Authorization, access control, least privilege, RBAC, ABAC, PBAC, permission matrix, policy engine, scope, role management, access token, OAuth, resource ownership, secure defaults, zero trust, tenant isolation, privilege escalation

---

Related NFRs

Authentication, Auditability, Audit Trail Integrity, Authenticity, Autonomy, Availability

---

Final Thought

Authorization isn’t just a security feature — it’s a way of saying we respect boundaries. It ensures that power is intentional, access is earned, and actions are contained within well-defined lines.

Whether you’re building a startup product or a multi-tenant enterprise platform, strong authorization is what allows systems to scale without sacrificing control. It protects not only the users, but also the engineers who build and operate the system.

And while it can be tempting to defer or simplify this layer in the early days, it almost always costs less — in time, trust, and risk — to design it right from the beginning.

Build with permission in mind. Because access is never accidental.

---

Interested in more like this?
I'm writing a full A–Z series on non-functional requirements — topics that shape how software behaves in the real world, not just what it does on paper.

Subscribe to this blog to get notified when the next one drops.