hadoop-hdfs-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Steve Loughran (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (HDFS-4680) Audit logging of client names
Date Wed, 10 Apr 2013 11:42:16 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-4680?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13627694#comment-13627694
] 

Steve Loughran commented on HDFS-4680:
--------------------------------------

Rather than client name, I'd recommend a workflow ID that can be propagated across multiple
Oozie, pig, hive queries, helping you track it down not to a user, but to a specific job.

This would aid not just auditing of client use, but cost auditing of entire workflows
                
> Audit logging of client names
> -----------------------------
>
>                 Key: HDFS-4680
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-4680
>             Project: Hadoop HDFS
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: namenode, security
>    Affects Versions: 2.0.3-alpha
>            Reporter: Andrew Wang
>            Assignee: Andrew Wang
>
> HDFS audit logging tracks HDFS operations made by different users, e.g. creation and
deletion of files. This is useful for after-the-fact root cause analysis and security. However,
logging merely the username is insufficient for many usecases. For instance, it is common
for a single user to run multiple MapReduce jobs (I believe this is the case with Hive). In
this scenario, given a particular audit log entry, it is difficult to trace it back to the
MR job or task that generated that entry.
> I see a number of potential options for implementing this.
> 1. Make an optional "client name" field part of the NN RPC format. We already pass a
{{clientName}} as a parameter in many RPC calls, so this would essentially make it standardized.
MR tasks could then set this field to the job and task ID.
> 2. This could be generalized to a set of optional key-value *tags* in the NN RPC format,
which would then be audit logged. This has standalone benefits outside of just verifying MR
task ids.
> 3. Neither of the above two options actually securely verify that MR clients are who
they claim they are. Doing this securely requires the JobTracker to sign MR task attempts,
and then having the NN verify this signature. However, this is substantially more work, and
could be built on after idea #2.
> Thoughts welcomed.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

Mime
View raw message