Which read capabilities should the interface open, is the document list and contact information sensitive

Which read capabilities should be opened for the external interface, and whether the document list and contact information are sensitive data - these two questions should be answered separately: The document list is already public and can be released; although the contact information is also displayed on the page, it belongs to a highly sensitive read item that needs to be evaluated separately. The basis for judgment is not whether it can be seen on the page, but what will happen after it is batched and taken away through the interface. The page shows one contact information at a time to one person, while the interface can return the list of contact information for the entire site at one time, completely changing the cost of reading and the extent of leakage. Designing read capabilities in layers according to the scope of exposure will prevent the interface from becoming a data export channel.

Sort according to whether it is originally public or not

AnQiCMS is often called by interfaces for high-frequency capabilities including document list and details, categories and tags, image upload, messages and comments, friendship links, system settings and contact information. These capabilities are not at the same level of sensitivity, and the open strategies of each layer are different after stratification.

Which types in the read ability need to be evaluated separately

Contact information and system settings are the two types that need to be judged separately. After the contact information is summarized, it becomes a usable marketing list, and it is also the material for phishing and phone harassment. A more secure approach on the interface side is to return by page or by column, and not to provide the list form of the entire site at one time. System settings belong to another type of problem: it exposes the running status and switches of the site, and reading it is equivalent to reading the map of the attack surface. It is not open by default.

Leave messages and comments should distinguish between 'displayed after passing the review' and 'includes pending reviews.' The latter includes the original text submitted by users and their contact information and should never appear in the external read interface. The same applies to uploading images; they can be retrieved by specific path and should not provide the ability to traverse directories.

What should the interface document specify?

Each read capability in the interface document should specify four things: whether authentication is required, which fields are returned, frequency limits, and which fields are only returned under administrative accounts. If the document is not clear about these three layers, the party accessing the interface will call it in the broadest possible way, and the risk is borne by the site.

The authentication part should clearly explain how the token is passed and how to refresh it after expiration; the field part should specify which fields may be empty instead of omitted; the rate limiting part should provide actual constraints instead of 'depending on the situation'. In the interface help, it is better to divide the public capabilities and the authorized capabilities into two lists than a long one, so that the integrator can quickly determine which path to take.

Write operation and the exposure range of site-wide operations

Beyond reading ability, what needs to be controlled is the scope of operation. The MCP interface sets the exposure range according to the intent domain, and operations such as backup, upgrade, and multi-site are classified as high-risk domains, which are closed by default and need to be explicitly enabled. This is especially important under multi-site management: a single configuration error does not affect just one site, but rather affects a batch of sites together. Keeping high-risk domains in the default closed state and opening them one by one according to business needs is much cheaper than rolling back later.

The write operation still needs to be accompanied by a level confirmation: merge batch writes into one approval, so that the caller can see which objects this batch will change, to avoid a single误 call changing all documents. The open read interface does not trigger this kind of risk, but once the write capability is also released, approval and scope control must be in place.

Common questions

The document list can be made public, why do we still need to limit the flow?What is made public is single-page content, which becomes a full-site collection when called frequently in batches. The combination of throttling and anti-crawling interference codes can ensure that normal access is not affected, while also raising the cost of moving the entire site.

Is it too strict to only give the contact information interface to administrators?It is not certain. Returning by page is a common requirement, the key is not to provide the form of 'get all at once', when the business needs a complete list, go through the background export and leave a record.

Will the default closure of high-risk domains affect normal integration?It only affects the integration that needs these operations. When needed, explicitly enable the corresponding intent domain, which is easier to verify who is using it than to turn on all capabilities for convenience.

How detailed should the interface document be written?Write it until the integrating party does not need to ask any more: authentication method, field meaning, null value behavior, frequency limit, error return form, all five are in place before it can be considered usable.