Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-hbase-issues-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-hbase-issues-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9D5E7109D5 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2013 07:01:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 64039 invoked by uid 500); 23 Dec 2013 07:01:10 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-hbase-issues-archive@hbase.apache.org Received: (qmail 63868 invoked by uid 500); 23 Dec 2013 07:01:02 -0000 Mailing-List: contact issues-help@hbase.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list issues@hbase.apache.org Received: (qmail 63711 invoked by uid 99); 23 Dec 2013 07:00:58 -0000 Received: from arcas.apache.org (HELO arcas.apache.org) (140.211.11.28) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 23 Dec 2013 07:00:58 +0000 Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2013 07:00:58 +0000 (UTC) From: "Andrew Purtell (JIRA)" To: issues@hbase.apache.org Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Subject: [jira] [Commented] (HBASE-6104) Require EXEC permission to call coprocessor endpoints MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-JIRA-FingerPrint: 30527f35849b9dde25b450d4833f0394 [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-6104?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13855450#comment-13855450 ] Andrew Purtell commented on HBASE-6104: --------------------------------------- Significant functional change - can I get another review / +1: [~stack], [~anoop.hbase], [~ram_krish] ? > Require EXEC permission to call coprocessor endpoints > ----------------------------------------------------- > > Key: HBASE-6104 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-6104 > Project: HBase > Issue Type: Sub-task > Components: Coprocessors, security > Reporter: Gary Helmling > Assignee: Andrew Purtell > Fix For: 0.98.0, 0.99.0 > > Attachments: 6104.patch, 6104.patch, 6104.patch, 6104.patch > > > The EXEC action currently exists as only a placeholder in access control. It should really be used to enforce access to coprocessor endpoint RPC calls, which are currently unrestricted. > How the ACLs to support this would be modeled deserves some discussion: > * Should access be scoped to a specific table and CoprocessorProtocol extension? > * Should it be possible to grant access to a CoprocessorProtocol implementation globally (regardless of table)? > * Are per-method restrictions necessary? > * Should we expose hooks available to endpoint implementors so that they could additionally apply their own permission checks? Some CP endpoints may want to require READ permissions, others may want to enforce WRITE, or READ + WRITE. > To apply these kinds of checks we would also have to extend the RegionObserver interface to provide hooks wrapping HRegion.exec(). -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.1.5#6160)