[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-11471?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Ben Bromhead updated CASSANDRA-11471:
-------------------------------------
    Attachment: CASSANDRA-11471

First cut of support for SASL negotiation in V4 for comment. 

The Authenticate message returns a comma seperated list of SASL mechanisms 
supported by the IAuthenticator class. Backwards compatible with V3 (returns 
classname instead).

Currently does not support detection of downgrade attacks as there is no 
integrity mechanisms. I think it's sufficient to rely on SSL for this.

Currently up to the IAuthenticator implementation to handle client selection of 
SASL mechanism (should be in the first response from client).

I have not updated CQL spec in this patch either. 

> Add SASL mechanism negotiation to the native protocol
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CASSANDRA-11471
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-11471
>             Project: Cassandra
>          Issue Type: Sub-task
>          Components: CQL
>            Reporter: Sam Tunnicliffe
>              Labels: client-impacting
>         Attachments: CASSANDRA-11471
>
>
> Introducing an additional message exchange into the authentication sequence 
> would allow us to support multiple authentication schemes and [negotiation of 
> SASL mechanisms|https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4422#section-3.2]. 
> The current {{AUTHENTICATE}} message sent from Client to Server includes the 
> java classname of the configured {{IAuthenticator}}. This could be superceded 
> by a new message which lists the SASL mechanisms supported by the server. The 
> client would then respond with a new message which indicates it's choice of 
> mechanism.  This would allow the server to support multiple mechanisms, for 
> example enabling both {{PLAIN}} for username/password authentication and 
> {{EXTERNAL}} for a mechanism for extracting credentials from SSL 
> certificates\* (see the example in 
> [RFC-4422|https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4422#appendix-A]). Furthermore, the 
> server could tailor the list of supported mechanisms on a per-connection 
> basis, e.g. only offering certificate based auth to encrypted clients. 
> The client's response should include the selected mechanism and any initial 
> response data. This is mechanism-specific; the {{PLAIN}} mechanism consists 
> of a single round in which the client sends encoded credentials as the 
> initial response data and the server response indicates either success or 
> failure with no futher challenges required.
> From a protocol perspective, after the mechanism negotiation the exchange 
> would continue as in protocol v4, with one or more rounds of 
> {{AUTH_CHALLENGE}} and {{AUTH_RESPONSE}} messages, terminated by an 
> {{AUTH_SUCCESS}} sent from Server to Client upon successful authentication or 
> an {{ERROR}} on auth failure. 
> XMPP performs mechanism negotiation in this way, 
> [RFC-3920|http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3920#section-6] includes a good 
> overview.
> \* Note: this would require some a priori agreement between client and server 
> over the implementation of the {{EXTERNAL}} mechanism.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Reply via email to