incubator-deltacloud-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <>
Subject Re: Dynamic selection of driver
Date Fri, 12 Nov 2010 15:54:22 GMT

On Nov 12, 2010, at 10:42 AM, Toby Crawley wrote:

> On 11/12/2010 10:26 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> On Nov 12, 2010, at 10:04 AM, Toby Crawley wrote:
>>> If we suspect the source of the headers, we should suspect any data in the request.
If an entity can munge headers, it can munge anything else in the request - the requests currently
have no signing mechanism. If this type of security is a concern, the deltacloud server should
be accessed via https. The client is based on RestClient, so should support https out of the
box if deltacloud is running with a valid certificate. If using a self signed certificate,
the client would probably need to be modified to not validate the server cert, or given the
CA for the server cert so it can validate.
>> That's not 100% true. Sure, one can munge headers; it's trivial. But what if
>> there is some simple md5 hash check, for example, related to the IP
>> address of the client and some shared secret. The client IP, since it's
>> NOT part of the http request, is not as easily munged...
>> Any time you use http req headers as a control mechanism, you need
>> some sort of a&a mechanism to provide oversight. Even something as
>> simple a Digest auth (or some variant) provides *some* level of
>> protection w/o the full overhead of ssl.
>> Of course, it goes w/o saying, that I'm offering to *add* this
>> capability ;)
> Yes, ssl is not the only solution, but adds end to end security over the entire request,
without adding complexity to the deltacloud code. I don't see a deltacloud service getting
enough traffic to justify worrying about ssl overhead, and I would be more worried about someone
extracting my cloud credentials, or munging the actual request itself than altering the driver
or endpoint headers.

So it's either "trust nothing" or "trust everything"? :) Methinks that there's
a middle ground somewhere in there *grin*

View raw message