Switch to id-based affiliation determination

chrome/browser/extensions/api/enterprise_device_attributes/enterprise_device_attributes_api.cc

Index: chrome/browser/extensions/api/enterprise_device_attributes/enterprise_device_attributes_api.cc
diff --git a/chrome/browser/extensions/api/enterprise_device_attributes/enterprise_device_attributes_api.cc b/chrome/browser/extensions/api/enterprise_device_attributes/enterprise_device_attributes_api.cc
index fe3bc1b2ab637f05a8276f74dedb83222245bf53..b4cc94022b8fb9b2f25b6dfcc239951219b30a4c 100644
--- a/chrome/browser/extensions/api/enterprise_device_attributes/enterprise_device_attributes_api.cc
+++ b/chrome/browser/extensions/api/enterprise_device_attributes/enterprise_device_attributes_api.cc
@@ -22,14 +22,11 @@ namespace {
 bool IsPermittedToGetDeviceId(content::BrowserContext* context) {
   policy::BrowserPolicyConnectorChromeOS* connector =
       g_browser_process->platform_part()->browser_policy_connector_chromeos();
-
   const user_manager::User* user =
       chromeos::ProfileHelper::Get()->GetUserByProfile(
           Profile::FromBrowserContext(context));
 
-  return connector->IsEnterpriseManaged() &&
-         connector->GetUserAffiliation(user->email()) ==
-             policy::USER_AFFILIATION_MANAGED;
+  return connector->IsEnterpriseManaged() && user->is_affiliated();

[Andrew T Wilson (Slow), 2015/09/16 15:02:06]

Why do we need to call IsEnterpriseManaged() here? Isn't calling is_affiliated()
sufficient?

[peletskyi, 2015/09/21 14:17:25]

From my point of view connector->IsEnterpriseManaged() is not necessary here
even in old version. But my idea was to make as few changes as possible.
I think we need ask author for the review.
Done.

 }
 
 // Returns the directory device id for the permitted extensions or an empty