[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-14845?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Sivaguru Sankaridurg reassigned HADOOP-14845:
---------------------------------------------

    Assignee: Steve Loughran  (was: Sivaguru Sankaridurg)

> azure getFileStatus not making any auth checks
> ----------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HADOOP-14845
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-14845
>             Project: Hadoop Common
>          Issue Type: Sub-task
>          Components: fs/azure
>            Reporter: Sivaguru Sankaridurg
>            Assignee: Steve Loughran
>              Labels: azure, fs, secure, wasb
>         Attachments: HADOOP-14845.001.patch, HADOOP-14845.002.patch, 
> HADOOP-14845.003.patch, HADOOP-14845-branch-2-001.patch.txt, 
> HADOOP-14845-branch-2-002.patch
>
>
> The HDFS spec requires only traverse checks for any file accessed via 
> getFileStatus ... and since WASB does not support traverse checks, removing 
> this call effectively removed all protections for the getFileStatus call. The 
> reasoning at that time was that doing a performAuthCheck was the wrong thing 
> to do, since it was going against the spec....and that the correct fix to the 
> getFileStatus issue was to implement traverse checks rather than go against 
> the spec by calling performAuthCheck. The side-effects of such a change were 
> not fully clear at that time, but the thinking was that it was safer to 
> remain true to the spec, as far as possible.
> The reasoning remains correct even today. But in view of the security hole 
> introduced by this change (that anyone can load up any other user's data in 
> hive), and keeping in mind that WASB does not intend to implement traverse 
> checks, we propose a compromise.
> We propose (re)introducing a read-access check to getFileStatus(), that would 
> check the existing ancestor for read-access whenever invoked. Although not 
> perfect (in that it is a departure from the spec), we believe that it is a 
> good compromise between having no checks at all; and implementing full-blown 
> traverse checks.
> For scenarios that deal with intermediate folders like mkdirs, the call would 
> check for read access against an existing ancestor (when invoked from shell) 
> for intermediate non-existent folders – {{ mkdirs /foo/bar, where only "/" 
> exists, would result in read-checks against "/" for "/","/foo" and "/foo/bar" 
> }}. This can be thought of, as being a close-enough substitute for the 
> traverse checks that hdfs does.
> For other scenarios that don't deal with non-existent intermediate folders – 
> like read, delete etc, the check will happen against the parent. Once again, 
> we can think of the read-check against the parent as a substitute for the 
> traverse check, which can be customized for various users with ranger 
> policies.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: common-issues-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: common-issues-h...@hadoop.apache.org

Reply via email to