nifi-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Robert Fellows <rob.fell...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Parameters within password/passphrase fields
Date Wed, 13 Nov 2019 22:18:03 GMT
Chris,
  I was able to reproduce your issue so I just logged the issue. You can
track it here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-6868. Feel free
to add any more context/comments as you like.

- Rob

On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 3:55 PM Robert Fellows <rob.fellows@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Chris,
>   I think there are 2 things happening here. First, I think there might be
> a bug in how sensitive parameters are evaluated on the backend and it is
> causing your issue. Please log an issue for this.
>
> Second, the UI is a bit confusing in terms of the availability of the
> "Convert to parameter" and "Go to Parameter" actions for sensitive
> parameter references in properties. However, this is due to the nature of
> sensitive parameters/properties. The actual value of the sensitive property
> is only ever known to the UI when the user enters the value. Once applied,
> those values are never sent back to the UI. The UI knows there is a value
> set, but it has no idea if it contains a parameter reference or not. The
> "Go To Parameter" action is only available when the UI can parse the value
> of the property and it matches the '#{...}' syntax format. Since the values
> is not sent to the UI, it can't parse the value to know if it is a
> parameter reference or not. The "Convert to parameter" action option is
> available just as a shortcut to create a new parameter, it is hidden when
> it is known that the value already references a parameter. This may be
> improved in the future, but it was implemented this way intentionally.
>
> - Rob
>
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 11:17 AM Chris Lundeberg <clundeberg@1904labs.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Recently we upgraded to Nifi 1.10 to take advantage of parameters and
>> using
>> those within our deployment process (using the registry).  I am seeing
>> some
>> strange behavior and want to confirm my understanding of how this new
>> feature works, before digging deeper.
>>
>> *Some general background info:*
>> I have a three node cluster running Nifi 1.10.  Its security enabled, but
>> I
>> am using an admin user with full rights to view/modify policies.  Its
>> running on linux and using java 8.
>>
>> *Producing the issue:*
>> As a test, I moved over some existing flows from our 1.9.2 cluster (same
>> specs and user rights as we build everything with puppet).  A few of the
>> processors are pulling and pushing to SFTP, for which we use an RSA key, a
>> known hosts file and the "paraphrase" property descriptor is populated
>> with
>> a password.  I converted that password over to a parameter within the
>> master processor group, set the "Process Group Parameter Context" for the
>> processor group this processor resides and saved everything.  After that
>> was done, I was able to access the parameter within #{ + ctrl + space.  I
>> choose the correct one, closed in the curly braces and saved the
>> processor.  I noticed immediately after saving and re-opening that the new
>> options icon to the right of the property descriptor reverted back from
>> "access the parameters" to "convert to a parameter".  I didn't think much
>> of it, besides maybe a small bug in the UI (Although that does save
>> correctly when you set a non sensitive field).  When I started the
>> processor, it immediately failed with an authentication error. I tried
>> setting a few different parameters, manually typing in #{ftp.password}
>> into
>> the paraphrase and even setting a new parameter directly from the helper
>> icon within the processor.  That didn't seem to change the behavior.
>>  Lastly I went back into the processor and removed the "Sensitive value
>> set" and typed the password in plain text and saved.  It worked fine after
>> that.
>>
>> I thought it may have been something off with our policies or even
>> install,
>> so I installed Nifi locally and experienced the same issue. It seems as
>> though the actual value is not being evaluated correctly when passed
>> into/through the processor for sensitive values.
>>
>> Has anyone experienced this before?
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Chris Lundeberg
>>
>
>
> --
> -------------------------------
> Rob Fellows
>


-- 
-------------------------------
Rob Fellows

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message