HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
supabase-community
supabase-custom-claims
JavaScript2023–2024
supabase-community / supabase-custom-claims

supabase-custom-claims

How to implement custom claims with Supabase

2Distinct people
2Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
676GitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

How to implement custom claims with Supabase

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use has been verified yet.

What people are saying

No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 5:04:57 PM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by week2 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2023-12-16 20:13:55 UTC to 2024-03-05 19:09:53 UTC. Weeks start Monday, UTC.

012023-12-11 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-12-18 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 commentsDec 112023-12-18 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-12-25 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2023-12-25 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-01-08 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2024-01-08 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-01-15 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2024-01-15 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-01-22 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2024-01-22 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-01-29 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 commentsJan 222024-01-29 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-02-05 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2024-02-05 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-02-12 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2024-02-12 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-02-19 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2024-02-19 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-02-26 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2024-02-26 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-03-04 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2024-03-04 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-03-11 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 commentsMar 4

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
Dec 112023-12-11 00:00:00 UTC2023-12-18 00:00:00 UTC101
Dec 182023-12-18 00:00:00 UTC2023-12-25 00:00:00 UTC000
Dec 252023-12-25 00:00:00 UTC2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Jan 12024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-01-08 00:00:00 UTC000
Jan 82024-01-08 00:00:00 UTC2024-01-15 00:00:00 UTC000
Jan 152024-01-15 00:00:00 UTC2024-01-22 00:00:00 UTC000
Jan 222024-01-22 00:00:00 UTC2024-01-29 00:00:00 UTC000
Jan 292024-01-29 00:00:00 UTC2024-02-05 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 52024-02-05 00:00:00 UTC2024-02-12 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 122024-02-12 00:00:00 UTC2024-02-19 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 192024-02-19 00:00:00 UTC2024-02-26 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 262024-02-26 00:00:00 UTC2024-03-04 00:00:00 UTC000
Mar 42024-03-04 00:00:00 UTC2024-03-11 00:00:00 UTC101

What Hacker News says

2 sources
Have a look at the supabase-community claims repo [1]. NOTE: this is for ACL type permissions where you want to provide granular access to a wide range of services. This stuff is "really cool" but just keep in mind that it is pretty advanced. And exactly as another commenter noted in this thread, it is possible to destroy your performance if you need to join on other tables in an extended version of this kind of RLS policy. In this repo, the logic is simply "if a claim exists on the JWT then grant access". But in a lot of cases you may want to do something like "if this user is an owner of <row in another table> then grant access". That can require a join to that other table. That logic can get even more complex, for example, you might want to say "allow the user access to this row if they are an owner of the project". So you have to do m
Read the rest
ore work to join from a child table, to a project table, to the user table, etc. These operations are in addition to any work you might be doing in the actual query that is executed. I have no idea if the query planner can recognize you are doing the same joins in the RLS as the main query and optimize that away. But at any rate, every single policy invocation (on every single query) will be executing this logic. These are all considerations if you are planning more advanced access policies to your data. If all you need is a binary "can access"/"cannot access" then basic RLS policies may be fine. But once you get into even moderately complex scenarios your policies are likely to balloon in complexity and you'll be writing a fair amount of PL/pgsql and fighting with testing and validating. 1.https://github.com/supabase-community/supabase-custom-claims...
In Fly Postgres, Managed by Supabase

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.