curator-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jordan Zimmerman <jor...@jordanzimmerman.com>
Subject Re: Help with ACLProvider + Kerberos
Date Thu, 07 Nov 2013 23:40:41 GMT
Yes, this is called "protection" mode. I'll paste the details from the Javadoc below. The TL;DR
is that this is required when using sequential/ephemeral with ZooKeeper. So, your ACLProvider
needs to be able to handle this. 

-Jordan

from create().withProtection():

It turns out there is an edge case that exists when creating sequential-ephemeral nodes. The
creation can succeed on the server, but the server can crash before the created node name
is returned to the client. However, the ZK session is still valid so the ephemeral node is
not deleted. Thus, there is no way for the client to determine what node was created for them.
Even without sequential-ephemeral, however, the create can succeed on the sever but the client
(for various reasons) will not know it.

Putting the create builder into protection mode works around this. The name of the node that
is created is prefixed with a GUID. If node creation fails the normal retry mechanism will
occur. On the retry, the parent path is first searched for a node that has the GUID in it.
If that node is found, it is assumed to be the lost node that was successfully created on
the first try and is returned to the caller.

On Nov 7, 2013, at 1:13 PM, Robert Kanter <rkanter@cloudera.com> wrote:

> I did some more investigating on this issue.  It looks like when you acquire a lock,
it creates the path by doing:
> ourPath = client.create().creatingParentsIfNeeded().withProtection().withMode(CreateMode.EPHEMERAL_SEQUENTIAL).forPath(path);
> When I do that manually where path is “/foo”, it actually doesn’t create “/foo”
yet and instead creates something like "/_c_2235fc7d-f5e8-4c3a-bb24-27c610022aaa-foo0000000000”.
 
> 
> From what I can tell, this has to do with the withprotection() and EPHEMERAL_SEQUENTIAL
mode and is to prevent some kind of problem I don’t quite understand from the javadocs.
 In any case, I believe that something eventually must rename "/_c_2235fc7d-f5e8-4c3a-bb24-27c610022aaa-foo0000000000”
to “/foo”.  When I checked, "/_c_2235fc7d-f5e8-4c3a-bb24-27c610022aaa-foo0000000000”
has the ACLs I set in the ACLProvider, so I’m thinking the problem must be happening when
the znode is renamed.  I’m not sure where/when that happens, but I’d guess its not using
the ACLProvider and that’s why “/foo" has the default ACLs.  
> 
> Do you think this is the cause?  Any idea on how to fix it or workaround it?  
> 
> thanks
> - Robert
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 1:58 PM, Robert Kanter <rkanter@cloudera.com> wrote:
> I created the below test class using JUnit.  It starts a TestingServer and connects to
it; then it creates a path directly to verify that the custom ACLProvider is being applied.
 Then it tries to do the same with an InterProcessReadWriteLock and fails the test because
its using the default ACLs.  I used “ip” instead of “sasl” to keep things simpler.
 
> 
> I did take a quick look at the Curator code and it seemed to be using the ACLProvider
through the CuratorFramework when using locks, but perhaps I missed something (and I’m not
super familiar with the codebase).  
> 
> Please take a look; thanks!
> - Robert
> 
> 
> import java.util.Collections;
> import java.util.List;
> import junit.framework.TestCase;
> import org.apache.curator.RetryPolicy;
> import org.apache.curator.framework.CuratorFramework;
> import org.apache.curator.framework.CuratorFrameworkFactory;
> import org.apache.curator.framework.api.ACLProvider;
> import org.apache.curator.framework.recipes.locks.InterProcessMutex;
> import org.apache.curator.framework.recipes.locks.InterProcessReadWriteLock;
> import org.apache.curator.retry.ExponentialBackoffRetry;
> import org.apache.curator.test.TestingServer;
> import org.apache.zookeeper.ZooDefs;
> import org.apache.zookeeper.data.ACL;
> import org.apache.zookeeper.data.Id;
> 
> public class TestLockACLs extends TestCase {
>     private TestingServer zkServer;
>     private CuratorFramework client;
>     private final List<ACL> acls = Collections.singletonList(new ACL(ZooDefs.Perms.ALL,
new Id("ip", "127.0.0.1")));
> 
>     @Override
>     protected void setUp() throws Exception {
>         super.setUp();
>         zkServer = new TestingServer();
>         createClient();
>     }
> 
>     @Override
>     protected void tearDown() throws Exception {
>         super.tearDown();
>         client.close();
>         zkServer.stop();
>         zkServer.close();
>     }
> 
>     private void createClient() throws Exception {
>         RetryPolicy retryPolicy = new ExponentialBackoffRetry(1000, 3);
>         String zkConnectionString = zkServer.getConnectString();
>         String zkNamespace = "ns";
>         client = CuratorFrameworkFactory.builder()
>                                             .namespace(zkNamespace)
>                                             .connectString(zkConnectionString)
>                                             .retryPolicy(retryPolicy)
>                                             .aclProvider(new MyACLProvider())
>                                             .build();
>         client.start();
>     }
> 
>     public void testLockACLs() throws Exception {
>         // Create a path directly and verify that MyACLProvider is being used
>         client.create().forPath("/foo");
>         assertNotNull(client.checkExists().forPath("/foo"));
>         assertEquals(ZooDefs.Perms.ALL, client.getACL().forPath("/foo").get(0).getPerms());
>         assertEquals("ip", client.getACL().forPath("/foo").get(0).getId().getScheme());
>         assertEquals("127.0.0.1", client.getACL().forPath("/foo").get(0).getId().getId());
> 
>         // Now try creating a lock and we'll see that it incorrectly has the default
world ACLs
>         // and doesn't seem to be using MyACLProvider
>         InterProcessReadWriteLock lock = new InterProcessReadWriteLock(client, "/bar");
>         InterProcessMutex writeLock = lock.writeLock();
>         writeLock.acquire();
>         assertNotNull(client.checkExists().forPath("/bar"));
>         assertEquals(ZooDefs.Perms.ALL, client.getACL().forPath("/bar").get(0).getPerms());
>         assertEquals("ip", client.getACL().forPath("/bar").get(0).getId().getScheme());
>         assertEquals("127.0.0.1", client.getACL().forPath("/bar").get(0).getId().getId());
>     }
> 
>     public class MyACLProvider implements ACLProvider {
> 
>         @Override
>         public List<ACL> getDefaultAcl() {
>             return acls;
>         }
> 
>         @Override
>         public List<ACL> getAclForPath(String path) {
>             return acls;
>         }
>     }
> }
> 
> 
> On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 6:10 PM, Jordan Zimmerman <jordan@jordanzimmerman.com> wrote:
> The ACLProvider should be called for every node created. It’s not getting called? Can
you produce a test that shows this?
> 
> -Jordan
> 
> On Nov 4, 2013, at 5:57 PM, Robert Kanter <rkanter@cloudera.com> wrote:
> 
>> I have everything working now except for one thing:
>> The ACLProvider doesn’t seem to be used for the locks (Curator’s InterProcessReadWriteLock);
they are always created with the default fully open ACLs.  I know the ACLProvider is correct
now because the service discovery is using it and znodes created by it have the correct ACLs.
 InterProcessReadWriteLock’s constructor takes in the CuratorFramework object, which has
the ACLProvider set.  
>> 
>> Any ideas?  
>> This sounds like it could be a Curator bug :(
>> I’m not familiar with Curator’s codebase, but I’ll try to take a look and see
if I can figure it out.  
>> 
>> thanks
>> - Robert
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Robert Kanter <rkanter@cloudera.com> wrote:
>> I don’t have it 100% working yet, but I’ve figured out a lot more, so I thought
I’d share in case anyone else runs into this:
>> 
>> The ZooDefs.Ids.CREATOR_ALL_ACL predefined ACL that I was trying to use is for the
“auth” scheme.  For SASL/Kerberos, we want “sasl”.  The javadoc for the predefined
one wasn’t very clear on that; I had to look at the code.  Using this is working:
>> Collections.singletonList(new ACL(Perms.ALL, new Id("sasl", principal)));
>> 
>> I was also able to find answers to the three questions I asked:
>> 1) Yes; looking through the code, its definitely grabbing the ACLProvider and using
it.
>> 2) Yes; I think the only way to do this is to recursively travel through the znodes
under /oozie and apply the ACL on starting up Oozie.  We should only have to do this if previously
it was setup without security and has since been reconfigured to use security; so we should
only have to do this once.  I can probably have a znode as a flag that states if everything
has ACLs or not to make it more efficient
>> 3) It doesn’t look like it; I’ll have to get the ZK client and do it from outside
Curator
>> 
>> 
>> - Robert
>> 
>> 
>> On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 5:47 PM, Jordan Zimmerman <jordan@jordanzimmerman.com>
wrote:
>> I don’t have any experience with this. Curator doesn’t do much - it sets up the
ACL as the CLI options dictate. I do know that you also have to do work on the server side
to make this work.
>> 
>> -JZ
>> 
>> On Oct 24, 2013, at 4:58 PM, Robert Kanter <rkanter@cloudera.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> Is there any documentation on using an ACLProvider and/or Kerberos?  
>>> 
>>> From what I gathered at various sites, to use Kerberos, all I have to do is set
the following properties before building the CuratorFramework client:
>>> System.setProperty("java.security.auth.login.config", "/path/to/jaasConfFile");
>>> System.setProperty("zookeeper.authProvider.1","org.apache.zookeeper.server.auth.SASLAuthenticationProvider");
>>> System.setProperty(ZooKeeperSaslClient.LOGIN_CONTEXT_NAME_KEY, "Client");
>>> Looking at the logs for the client and server, this appears to be working properly
and my program is connecting to ZooKeeper using Kerberos.  
>>> 
>>> The problem I'm having is with the ACLs.  
>>>  
>>> I'd like to set the ACLs so that only the Kerberos user running the program can
do anything.  From what I can tell, if I specify an ACLProvider, then Curator will automatically
use it for setting ACLs on all paths.  So, an ACLProvider like the following should do what
I want:
>>> public class CreatorACLProvider implements ACLProvider {
>>>    @Override
>>>     public List<ACL> getDefaultAcl() {
>>>         return ZooDefs.Ids.CREATOR_ALL_ACL;
>>>    }
>>>    @Override
>>>     public List<ACL> getAclForPath(String path) {
>>>         return ZooDefs.Ids.CREATOR_ALL_ACL;
>>>    }
>>> }
>>> Then I would just do this:
>>> client = CuratorFrameworkFactory.builder()
>>>                                 .namespace(zkNamespace)
>>>                                 .connectString(zkConnectionString)
>>>                                 .retryPolicy(retryPolicy)
>>>                                 .aclProvider(new CreatorACLProvider())
>>>                                 .build();
>>> client.start();
>>> 
>>> However, this doesn't seem to be working.  The zkcli returns this (on a newly
created znode):
>>> [zk: localhost:2181(CONNECTED) 8] getAcl /oozie/locks/0000000-131024162150146-oozie-oozi-W
>>> 'world,'anyone
>>> : Cdr.
>>> Is there something that I missed?  
>>> 
>>> A few other questions:
>>> 1) Will the ACLProvider cause the ACLs to be applied to znodes created by the
Curator recipes?  (e.g. InterProcessReadWriteLock, ServiceDiscovery, etc).  If not, then how
should I go about setting the ACLs for these znodes?  
>>> 2) I'm guessing that the ACLProvider is only applied when creating the znode,
right; so existing znodes from before I added the ACLProvider won't have the ACLs I want,
right?  What would be the best way to apply the ACLs to any existing znodes that don't have
it set?  (My goal is to have all znodes under /oozie have the CREATOR_ALL_ACL)
>>> 3) Is there a way to set the ACLs on the namespace itself (i.e. /oozie)?  The
methods that take a path (and automatically prepend the namespace) don't allow simply "/",
so it seems like I'd have to use the ZooKeeper client directly to set ACLs manually on the
namespace.  Or would simply passing an empty string "" work?
>>> 
>>> thanks
>>> - Robert
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 


Mime
View raw message