hbase-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "jiraposter@reviews.apache.org (Commented) (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (HBASE-3025) Coprocessor based simple access control
Date Tue, 01 Nov 2011 21:57:34 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-3025?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13141659#comment-13141659
] 

jiraposter@reviews.apache.org commented on HBASE-3025:
------------------------------------------------------



bq.  On 2011-09-27 16:58:47, Andrew Purtell wrote:
bq.  > security/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/security/rbac/AccessController.java,
line 192
bq.  > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/2041/diff/1/?file=45404#file45404line192>
bq.  >
bq.  >     Debug logging should go to LOG not AUDITLOG
bq.  
bq.  Gary Helmling wrote:
bq.      The idea was that all authorization decisions should be separated into audit log.
 Here we're allowing access, so AUDITLOG seemed to make sense.  I agree that this still needs
to be cleaned up a lot.  Maybe all audit logging should be done up in requirePermission()
with authorization result?  At the very least we need a consistent format and consistent logging
levels for messages (trace, right?).
bq.  
bq.  Andrew Purtell wrote:
bq.      > Maybe all audit logging should be done up in requirePermission() with authorization
result?
bq.      
bq.      Sounds good.
bq.      
bq.      > At the very least we need a consistent format and consistent logging levels
for messages (trace, right?).
bq.      
bq.      I'd argue for TRACE
bq.  
bq.  Gary Helmling wrote:
bq.      Reworked the audit logging to happen in requirePermission(), so we get a single log
message per auth check indicating success or failure, with a more consistent format.  Result
is logged to AUDITLOG at trace level.
bq.  
bq.  Michael Stack wrote:
bq.      Is there TRACE level in our commons interface?  I believe it just maps to DEBUG?
bq.  
bq.  Gary Helmling wrote:
bq.      Commons-logging source for 1.1.1 claims that with log4j >= 1.2.12, trace level
is supported.  Prior to that it's mapped to debug.

Oh.  We need TRACE bad.  We have 1.2.16 log4j.  Have you seen TRACE logs Gary?  If so, that'd
make me happy.


- Michael


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/2041/#review2077
-----------------------------------------------------------


On 2011-11-01 21:18:27, Gary Helmling wrote:
bq.  
bq.  -----------------------------------------------------------
bq.  This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
bq.  https://reviews.apache.org/r/2041/
bq.  -----------------------------------------------------------
bq.  
bq.  (Updated 2011-11-01 21:18:27)
bq.  
bq.  
bq.  Review request for hbase.
bq.  
bq.  
bq.  Summary
bq.  -------
bq.  
bq.  This patch implements access control list based authorization of HBase operations.  The
patch depends on the currently posted patch for HBASE-2742 (secure RPC engine).
bq.  
bq.  Key parts of the implementation are:
bq.  
bq.  * AccessControlLists - encapsulates storage of permission grants in a metadata table
("_acl_").  This differs from previous implementation where the ".META." table was used to
store permissions.
bq.  
bq.  * AccessController - 
bq.    - implements MasterObserver and RegionObserver, performing authorization checks in
each of the preXXX() hooks.  If authorization fails, an AccessDeniedException is thrown.
bq.    - implements AccessControllerProtocol as a coprocessor endpoint to provide RPC methods
for granting, revoking and listing permissions.
bq.  
bq.  * ZKPermissionWatcher (and TableAuthManager) - synchronizes ACL entries and updates throughout
the cluster nodes using ZK.  ACL entries are stored in per-table znodes as /hbase/acl/tablename.
bq.  
bq.  * Additional ruby shell scripts providing the "grant", "revoke" and "user_permission"
commands
bq.  
bq.  * Support for a new OWNER attribute in HTableDescriptor.  I could separate out this change
into a new JIRA for discussion, but I don't see it as currently useful outside of security.
 Alternately, I could handle the OWNER attribute completely in AccessController without changing
HTD, but that would make interaction via hbase shell a bit uglier.
bq.  
bq.  
bq.  This addresses bug HBASE-3025.
bq.      https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-3025
bq.  
bq.  
bq.  Diffs
bq.  -----
bq.  
bq.    security/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/security/access/AccessControlFilter.java
PRE-CREATION 
bq.    security/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/security/access/AccessControlLists.java
PRE-CREATION 
bq.    security/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/security/access/AccessController.java
PRE-CREATION 
bq.    security/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/security/access/AccessControllerProtocol.java
PRE-CREATION 
bq.    security/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/security/access/Permission.java PRE-CREATION

bq.    security/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/security/access/TableAuthManager.java
PRE-CREATION 
bq.    security/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/security/access/TablePermission.java
PRE-CREATION 
bq.    security/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/security/access/UserPermission.java
PRE-CREATION 
bq.    security/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/security/access/ZKPermissionWatcher.java
PRE-CREATION 
bq.    security/src/test/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/security/access/SecureTestUtil.java
PRE-CREATION 
bq.    security/src/test/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/security/access/TestAccessControlFilter.java
PRE-CREATION 
bq.    security/src/test/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/security/access/TestAccessController.java
PRE-CREATION 
bq.    security/src/test/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/security/access/TestTablePermissions.java
PRE-CREATION 
bq.    security/src/test/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/security/access/TestZKPermissionsWatcher.java
PRE-CREATION 
bq.    src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/HTableDescriptor.java 99875b8 
bq.    src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/coprocessor/BaseRegionObserver.java 8a40762 
bq.    src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/zookeeper/ZKUtil.java bb67e53 
bq.    src/main/resources/hbase-default.xml 3785533 
bq.    src/main/ruby/hbase.rb 4d27191 
bq.    src/main/ruby/hbase/admin.rb 61e04d8 
bq.    src/main/ruby/hbase/hbase.rb beb2450 
bq.    src/main/ruby/hbase/security.rb PRE-CREATION 
bq.    src/main/ruby/shell.rb 9a47600 
bq.    src/main/ruby/shell/commands.rb a352c2e 
bq.    src/main/ruby/shell/commands/grant.rb PRE-CREATION 
bq.    src/main/ruby/shell/commands/revoke.rb PRE-CREATION 
bq.    src/main/ruby/shell/commands/user_permission.rb PRE-CREATION 
bq.  
bq.  Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/2041/diff
bq.  
bq.  
bq.  Testing
bq.  -------
bq.  
bq.  
bq.  Thanks,
bq.  
bq.  Gary
bq.  
bq.


                
> Coprocessor based simple access control
> ---------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HBASE-3025
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-3025
>             Project: HBase
>          Issue Type: Sub-task
>          Components: coprocessors
>            Reporter: Andrew Purtell
>         Attachments: HBASE-3025.1.patch, HBASE-3025.2011-02-01.patch
>
>
> Thanks for the clarification Jeff which reminds me to edit this issue.
> Goals of this issue
> # Client access to HBase is authenticated
> # User data is private unless access has been granted
> # Access to data can be granted at a table or per column family basis. 
> Non-Goals of this issue
> The following items will be left out of the initial implementation for simplicity:
> # Row-level or per value (cell) This would require broader changes for storing the ACLs
inline with rows. It's still a future goal, but would slow down the initial implementation
considerably.
> # Push down of file ownership to HDFS While table ownership seems like a useful construct
to start with (at least to lay the groundwork for future changes), making HBase act as table
owners when interacting with HDFS would require more changes. In additional, while HDFS file
ownership would make applying quotas easy, and possibly make bulk imports more straightforward,
it's not clean it would offer a more secure setup. We'll leave this to evaluate in a later
phase.
> # HBase managed "roles" as collections of permissions We will not model "roles" internally
in HBase to begin with. We will instead allow group names to be granted permissions, which
will allow some external modeling of roles via group memberships. Groups will be created and
manipulated externally to HBase. 
> While the assignment of permissions to roles and roles to users (or other roles) allows
a great deal of flexibility in security policy, it would add complexity to the initial implementation.

> After the initial implementation, which will appear on this issue, we will evaluate the
addition of role definitions internal to HBase in a new JIRA. In this scheme, administrators
could assign permissions specifying HDFS groups, and additionally HBase roles. HBase roles
would be created and manipulated internally to HBase, and would appear distinct from HDFS
groups via some syntactic sugar. HBase role definitions will be allowed to reference other
HBase role definitions. 

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

        

Mime
View raw message