This is a submission for the Permit.io Authorization Challenge: Permissions Redefined

What I Built

I built Scrapebase - a web scraping service with tiered access controls that demonstrates API-first authorization using Permit.io. The project separates business logic from authorization concerns using Permit.io's policy-as-code approach.

In many applications, authorization is implemented as an afterthought, resulting in security vulnerabilities and technical debt. Scrapebase demonstrates how to build with authorization as a first-class concern from day one.

Key Features

• Tiered Service Levels: Free, Pro, and Admin tiers with different capabilities
• API Key Authentication: Simple authentication using API keys
• Role-Based Access Control: Permissions managed through Permit.io
• Domain Blacklist System: Resource-level restrictions for sensitive domains
• Text Processing: Basic and advanced text processing with role-based restrictions

How It Works

The core authentication and authorization flow:

1. User sends request with x-api-key header
2. permitAuth middleware intercepts the request
3. Middleware maps API key to user role (free_user, pro_user, or admin)
4. User is synced to Permit.io
5. Permission check runs against Permit.io cloud PDP
6. Request is allowed or denied based on policy decision

┌──────────┐ ┌───────────────┐ ┌────────────┐ ┌──────────────┐ │ Client │───▶│ Scrapebase API│───▶│permitAuth │───▶│ Permit.io │ │ │◀───│ │◀───│ middleware │◀───│ Cloud PDP │ └──────────┘ └───────────────┘ └────────────┘ └──────────────┘ │ ▲ │ │ └────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ Permission policies defined in Permit.io dashboard 

Demo

You can test the API using the following endpoints:

# Test with free user curl -X POST http://localhost:8080/api/processLinks \ -H "Content-Type: application/json" \ -H "x-api-key: 2025DEVChallenge_free" \ -d '{"url": "https://example.com"}' # Test with admin user curl -X POST http://localhost:8080/api/processLinks \ -H "Content-Type: application/json" \ -H "x-api-key: 2025DEVChallenge_admin" \ -d '{"url": "https://example.com", "advanced": true}' 

Project Repo

git clone https://github.com/0xtamizh/scrapebase-permit-IO cd scrapebase-permit-IO

npm install

cp .env.example .env

PERMIT_API_KEY=your_permit_api_key ADMIN_API_KEY=2025DEVChallenge_admin USER_API_KEY=2025DEVChallenge_user 

npm run dev

My Journey

The Problem with Traditional Authorization

Traditional approaches to authorization often result in permission checks scattered throughout application code, creating maintenance nightmares and security risks. When I started this project, I wanted to demonstrate how modern applications can embrace externalized authorization as a core architectural principle.

I chose to build a web scraping service because it presents meaningful access control requirements:

1. Tiered service levels that mirror real-world SaaS subscription models
2. Administrative functions that require elevated permissions
3. Resource-based restrictions through a domain blacklist system

The Power of API-First Authorization

The key insight that drove this project was the separation of concerns: business logic should be distinct from authorization decisions. By using Permit.io, I was able to:

1. Define all permission policies in one place
2. Enforce consistent access control across all endpoints
3. Update policies without changing application code

The implementation was straightforward - here's the core middleware that powers the authorization flow:

// Map API key to user role switch (apiKey) { case process.env.ADMIN_API_KEY: userKey = '2025DEVChallenge_admin'; tier = 'admin'; break; // ...other keys } // Sync user to Permit.io await permit.api.syncUser({ key: userKey, email: `${userKey}@scrapebase.xyz`, attributes: { tier, roles: [tier] } }); // Check permission const action = req.body.advanced ? 'scrape_advanced' : 'scrape_basic'; const permissionCheck = await permit.check(user.key, action, 'website'); if (!permissionCheck) { return res.status(403).json({ success: false, error: 'Access denied by Permit.io' }); } 

Challenges Faced

Cloud PDP Limitations

Initially, I tried implementing Attribute-Based Access Control (ABAC) by passing resource attributes:

// This DIDN'T work with cloud PDP const resource = { type: 'website', key: hostname, attributes: { is_blacklisted: isBlacklistedDomain } }; const permissionCheck = await permit.check(user.key, action, resource); 

The cloud PDP returned 501 errors because it only supports basic RBAC. I had to simplify to a pure RBAC approach:

// This works with cloud PDP const permissionCheck = await permit.check(user.key, action, resourceType); 

Role Assignment

Another challenge was ensuring roles were properly synchronized and recognized. The solution was two-fold:

1. Properly sync users with their role information
2. Manually configure role permissions in the Permit.io dashboard

Using Permit.io for Authorization

Setting up Permit.io involved these key steps:

1. Creating a project in the Permit.io dashboard
2. Defining resources (website), actions (scrape_basic, scrape_advanced), and roles (free_user, pro_user, admin)
3. Configuring the permission matrix in the dashboard
4. Integrating the Permit.io SDK into my application

Here's the role-based capability matrix I implemented:

Permission Enforcement

Permissions are enforced in two places:

1. The permitAuth middleware for API endpoints:

 const permissionCheck = await permit.check(user.key, action, 'website'); if (!permissionCheck) { return res.status(403).json({ success: false, error: 'Access denied' }); } 

1. Directly in route handlers for specific features:

 // src/routes/summarize.ts if (summarize) { const userTier = req.user?.attributes?.tier; if (userTier !== 'pro_user' && userTier !== 'admin') { return res.status(403).json({ success: false, error: 'Access denied', details: 'Text summarization is only available for Pro and Admin users' }); } } 

What I Learned

Building Scrapebase with Permit.io taught me how to:

1. Separate authorization concerns from business logic
2. Implement role-based access control with external policy management
3. Design a flexible permission system that doesn't require code changes to update policies

The advantages of this approach are clear:

1. Separation of concerns: Business logic remains focused on core functionality while authorization is handled externally
2. Adaptable policies: Permissions can be updated without code changes or redeployments
3. Consistent enforcement: Authorization decisions follow the same rules across all application endpoints
4. Improved security: Centralized policy management reduces the risk of inconsistent permission checks
5. Developer experience: Cleaner codebase with reduced authorization-related complexity

This externalized approach enables business stakeholders to manage authorization policies directly through the Permit.io dashboard, while developers focus on building features - the hallmark of a well-designed API-first authorization system.

Future Improvements

With more time, I would:

1. Set up a local PDP to enable ABAC with resource attributes
2. Implement tenant isolation for multi-tenant support
3. Add UI components in the admin dashboard to view permission audit logs
4. Create more granular roles and permissions beyond the three tiers
5. Add a user management section to assign roles through the UI

Scrapebase demonstrates how modern SaaS apps can delegate complex authorization to a specialized service like Permit.io, allowing developers to focus on core features while maintaining robust access controls.