The optimal approach from a RESTful perspective would be to use the OPTIONS verb over the endpoint to discover which verbs are publicly allowed, which ones require authentication and which ones, once authenticated, are effectively available to the current user. Unfortunately, this approach could be more expensive to implement and we should avoid the trap to "duplicate" the check in both the OPTIONS than in the real verb, building a solution that rely on the @PreAuthorize security. Moreover, as the PreAuthorize security is not necessary the whole story as additional check could be performed by the dspace-api during the method execution this could lead to inconsistency or to the need to revisit our current @PreAuthorize implementations.
For these reason I suggest to don't focus on such approach at least in DSpace 7, it could be a nice addition but as it doesn't seem to be sufficient for our use case it would be not top priority (i.e. it would be beneficial for not yet identified REST client and not for our Angular UI).
An endpoint where we can "simply" check if a specific action is allowed or not, i.e. /api/authz/check?action=<:action>&resource=<:resource>, is formally not RESTful as there is no "REST resource" involved. An endpoint SHOULD represent a "collection of resource" and we should access this collection, a subset of resources or interact with a specific resource via the HTTP verbs to change its state.
Two possible approaches
1) Emulate the DSpace 6 behavior: use the resourcepolicies endpoint with an additional search method to mimic the feature of AuthorizeService.actionAnyOf method (see this internal 4Science PR) and, eventually, add special flags in the userDetails included in the JWT (i.e. an isAdmin, isCommunityAdmin, isCollectionAdmin attributes in the JWT token) - in this case it is still uncertain how to deal with the support methods provided by the org.dspace.app.util.AuthorizeUtil classes
2) Introduce the concept of "features" as an high level vision of what the user can do, where.
The structure of a feature resource could be
id : "<eperson-uuuid>-my feature-<scope-uuid>",
name: "my feature",
href: link-to-the-resource (site for "unscoped" feature
Please note that this doesn't imply the need to keep a corresponding structure on the database as everything can be "generated on the fly" checking the resourcepolicy, the dspace configuration and our business logic.
There is no initial need to have features linked to group as at the checking time we always check permission on a specific user. In future if we want to visualize which feature are available to a specific group we can do that without touching anything assuming that features available to a group will be also "listed" as available to each member of such group.
On a such endpoint we can easily implement a GET /api/authz/features/<:feature-id> hardcoding the logic the feature id generation on the REST client or, better, we can add a search method /api/authz/features/search/criteria?scope=<:dso-uuid>&eperson=<:eperson-uuid>&name=<:feature-name>.
A null eperson can be used to identify anonymous feature, like access to the self-registration or the public statistics.
On the implementation side we could have an interface to define "feature" and a set of Beans that will be registered to provide the implementations. When a request comes we should "only" retrieve the corresponding bean and run the method to verify the permission to decide if such "feature resource" exists or not for a specific user.
If is obviously to think about future extension to retrieve all the features associate to a specific user, just iterating of the beans implementations, or provide a configuration endpoints that will list of the available features (beans).
The controversial aspect of such proposal is the definition of what is a "feature", i.e. edit of an item, withdrawn, reinstate, move are different features? self-register and user creation are different features?
Unless otherwise specified, all DSpace v7 REST API methods/endpoints will default to ANONYMOUS access. This page details how to access restrict specific endpoints/methods by simply adding