Dmitrii,
I'm not a security expert, but I have a concern about the usage
of common purpose mechanism for authentication purposes.
I mean any other component seem to be able to get this data which
should be private. Looks like a dangerous hack to me, to be honest.
Maybe we should create and use some kind of "security context" for
this purpose with limited access.
Best Regards,
Igor
On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 3:29 PM Dmitrii Ryabov <somefire...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Ok, if no one have objections, I will restrict a map by strings only.
>
> чт, 23 янв. 2020 г., 17:20 Pavel Tupitsyn <ptupit...@apache.org>:
>
> > > Well, my understanding was a binary object with compact footer = false
> > is totally standalone entity and can be read without any external
> metadata
> > Not exactly: type name and field names are unknown, you only have typeId,
> > field ids and positions.
> > There is one more Marshaller "mode": UNREGISTERED_TYPE_ID. In this mode,
> > full type name is included in the binary object.
> > However, field names are still missing and the class needs to be present
> to
> > deserialize.
> > That's why arbitrary objects should not be allowed in the handshake: in
> > most cases they can't be decoded.
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 2:27 PM Dmitrii Ryabov <somefire...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Alexei, yes, compactFooter is used only in 1 place.
> > >
> > > ```
> > >
> > > BinaryWriterExImpl.marshal0() {
> > >
> > > BinaryClassDescriptor desc = ctx.descriptorForClass(cls);
> > >
> > > // descriptor transportation fails here
> > >
> > > ...
> > >
> > > desc.write(obj, this); // compactFooter here
> > >
> > > }
> > >
> > > ```
> > >
> > > чт, 23 янв. 2020 г., 14:15 Pavel Tupitsyn <ptupit...@apache.org>:
> > >
> > > > > If we support only strings it will be necessary to encode binary
> > values
> > > > to
> > > > > something like BASE64 which is not sounds good from usability side
> > > >
> > > > There should be no need to put binary values to attributes. What's
> the
> > > use
> > > > case?
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 2:08 PM Alexei Scherbakov <
> > > > alexey.scherbak...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > > Footer is checked in postWrite - much later class descriptor
> check.
> > > > >
> > > > > Well, my understanding was a binary object with compact footer =
> > false
> > > is
> > > > > totally standalone entity and can be read without any external
> > > metadata.
> > > > > Dmitrii Ryabov can you double check ?
> > > > >
> > > > > If we support only strings it will be necessary to encode binary
> > values
> > > > to
> > > > > something like BASE64 which is not sounds good from usability side.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > чт, 23 янв. 2020 г. в 13:26, Nikita Amelchev <nsamelc...@gmail.com
> >:
> > > > >
> > > > > > +1 for the hardcoded String type only
> > > > > >
> > > > > > чт, 23 янв. 2020 г. в 13:15, Pavel Tupitsyn <
> ptupit...@apache.org
> > >:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > - Cross-platform binary objects are totally possible, all those
> > > thin
> > > > > > > clients support them.
> > > > > > > - User attributes can be useful, no objections here
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > However, I don't think we should allow arbitrary objects in
> user
> > > > > > attributes.
> > > > > > > Let's make them string only, much less to worry about.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > And using attributes for authentication still seems weird and
> > > dirty.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 12:40 PM Dmitrii Ryabov <
> > > > somefire...@gmail.com
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Even if compact footer is disabled ?
> > > > > > > > Footer is checked in postWrite - much later class descriptor
> > > check.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > чт, 23 янв. 2020 г., 12:23 Alexei Scherbakov <
> > > > > > alexey.scherbak...@gmail.com
> > > > > > > > >:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > чт, 23 янв. 2020 г. в 12:17, Dmitrii Ryabov <
> > > > somefire...@gmail.com
> > > > > >:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > The protocol must be language-agnostic. If we add some
> > > > features
> > > > > > > > there,
> > > > > > > > > > let's make sure they are usable from anywhere.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > That's why I want to allow primitives only. Any language
> > can
> > > > send
> > > > > > > > numbers
> > > > > > > > > > and strings.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > In general it's possible to have cross-platform complex
> data
> > > > > > structures,
> > > > > > > > > for example see protobuf.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Binary marshaller, before packing object to byte[], will
> > try
> > > to
> > > > > use
> > > > > > > > > > discovery processor and send message containing class
> > > > descriptor.
> > > > > > But
> > > > > > > > > thin
> > > > > > > > > > clients don't have discovery. Furthermore, if we write
> > binary
> > > > > > > > marshaller
> > > > > > > > > > without class descriptor synchronization, we can get
> > objects
> > > > with
> > > > > > > > > different
> > > > > > > > > > class versions and corresponding exceptions.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Even if compact footer is disabled ?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > But we can say users to declare their classes in
> > > > > > > > > > META-INF/classnames.properties and current binary
> > marshaller
> > > > will
> > > > > > works
> > > > > > > > > > good.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > This approach doesn't looks like cross-platform.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > чт, 23 янв. 2020 г., 12:13 Alex Plehanov <
> > > > > plehanov.a...@gmail.com
> > > > > > >:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Hello,
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > User attributes also (besides authentication) can be
> used
> > > to
> > > > > pass
> > > > > > > > some
> > > > > > > > > > info
> > > > > > > > > > > about an application that uses a client and then
> display
> > > this
> > > > > > > > > information
> > > > > > > > > > > in monitoring tools. Other vendors use such approach
> > > (Oracle
> > > > > DB,
> > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > > > example, have DBMS_APPLICATION_INFO package,
> PostgreeSQL
> > > have
> > > > > > > > > > > application_name connection property and application
> > > > > information
> > > > > > > > > > available
> > > > > > > > > > > later in system views).
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > About allowed data types: we should definitely limit
> > > > attribute
> > > > > > types
> > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > > only primitive types. Thin client binary marshaller
> can't
> > > > send
> > > > > > > > > > information
> > > > > > > > > > > about custom types before the handshake.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > ср, 22 янв. 2020 г. в 21:39, Pavel Tupitsyn <
> > > > > > ptupit...@apache.org>:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > I've looked through the PR more closely, trying to
> > > > understand
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > use
> > > > > > > > > > > case,
> > > > > > > > > > > > and there are some Java-specific things going on
> (left
> > a
> > > > > > comment).
> > > > > > > > > > > > Please keep in mind that we have thin clients in
> > Python,
> > > > > > Node.js,
> > > > > > > > > C++,
> > > > > > > > > > > C#.
> > > > > > > > > > > > The protocol must be language-agnostic. If we add
> some
> > > > > features
> > > > > > > > > there,
> > > > > > > > > > > > let's make sure they are usable from anywhere.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 9:21 PM Pavel Tupitsyn <
> > > > > > > > ptupit...@apache.org
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > The approach with UserAttributes map looks dirty to
> > me
> > > > and
> > > > > > raises
> > > > > > > > > > > > > questions:
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > - Why is UserAttributes property related to
> > > > authentication?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > - UserAttributes name implies that users can put
> > there
> > > > > > anything
> > > > > > > > > they
> > > > > > > > > > > > want,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > but what for? What are those additional use cases?
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > I think we should focus on a specific problem at
> hand
> > > and
> > > > > > avoid
> > > > > > > > > > > > > unnecessary future-proofing.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > What are current and potential future custom
> > > > authenticators
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > what
> > > > > > > > > > > kind
> > > > > > > > > > > > > of data do they need?
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 6:28 PM Nikita Amelchev <
> > > > > > > > > > nsamelc...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> I think we should add this. It will provide an
> extra
> > > > level
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > > security.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> This approach is used in many products, for
> example
> > in
> > > > AWS
> > > > > > > > (MFA).
> > > > > > > > > > [1]
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> [1]
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://docs.aws.amazon.com/general/latest/gr/aws-sec-cred-types.html#multi-factor-authentication
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> ср, 22 янв. 2020 г. в 18:13, Andrey Kuznetsov <
> > > > > > > > stku...@gmail.com
> > > > > > > > > >:
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > Hi, Pavel!
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > Sometimes single authentication factor is not
> > > enough.
> > > > > > > > Attributes
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> proposed
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > allow to add extra factors flexibly.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > ср, 22 янв. 2020 г., 17:39 Pavel Tupitsyn <
> > > > > > > > ptupit...@apache.org
> > > > > > > > > >:
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > Token can be sent instead of a password (like
> > git
> > > > > works
> > > > > > with
> > > > > > > > > > > GitHub
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > tokens).
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > For now I don't see a reason to include
> > attributes
> > > > > into
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > handshake
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > message.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 5:32 PM Ilya
> Kasnacheev
> > <
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> ilya.kasnach...@gmail.com
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Hello!
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > One does not send security certificate as
> > > > attribute.
> > > > > > The
> > > > > > > > > only
> > > > > > > > > > > way
> > > > > > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > obtain
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > peer security certificate is to ask SSL
> engine
> > > to
> > > > > > provide
> > > > > > > > > it.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Nevertheless, I can see how it can be useful
> > > with
> > > > > e.g.
> > > > > > > > > > Kerberos,
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> which is
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > token-based IIRC.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > Ilya Kasnacheev
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > ср, 22 янв. 2020 г. в 17:20, Dmitrii Ryabov
> <
> > > > > > > > > > > > somefire...@gmail.com
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> >:
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > This map is something like user object
> from
> > > > > > > > > > > > `SecurityCredentials`.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > Sometimes login and password are not
> enough
> > > for
> > > > > > security
> > > > > > > > > > > checks.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> For
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > example, we can send security certificate
> > and
> > > > > > validate
> > > > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > > > > inside
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > authenticator.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > ср, 22 янв. 2020 г., 17:16 Igor Sapego <
> > > > > > > > > isap...@apache.org
> > > > > > > > > > >:
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > Hi Dmitrii,
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > Can you please explain your use case?
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > I'm not sure I'm getting what is the
> > > > motivation
> > > > > of
> > > > > > > > this
> > > > > > > > > > > > change.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > Best Regards,
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > Igor
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 5:11 PM Pavel
> > > > Tupitsyn <
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> ptupit...@apache.org
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Hi Dmitrii,
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Honestly, I could not grasp the
> problem,
> > > can
> > > > > you
> > > > > > > > > explain
> > > > > > > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> in more
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > detail?
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > What do we solve by adding a map with
> > > > > arbitrary
> > > > > > > > stuff
> > > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> client
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > protocol handshake?
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 5:02 PM
> Dmitrii
> > > > > Ryabov <
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > somefire...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Hello, Igniters!
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > I want to add the possibility of
> > sending
> > > > > user
> > > > > > > > > defined
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> attributes
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > from
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > thin
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > clients. And check them inside
> custom
> > > > > > > > authenticator
> > > > > > > > > > > during
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > handshake
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > [1].
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > There is an issue in hardcoded
> binary
> > > > writer
> > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > JDBC
> > > > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > `IgniteClient`.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > This writer searches for a classes
> in
> > > the
> > > > > JDK
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > META-INF/classnames.properties, and
> > > tries
> > > > to
> > > > > > sync
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> notdeclared
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > classes
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > with
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > cluster. But fails because current
> > > > > > classloading
> > > > > > > > uses
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> discovery.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > I'd like to keep this writer and
> allow
> > > > only
> > > > > > > > > primitive
> > > > > > > > > > > > types
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> and
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > `String`
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > for user attributes to prevent
> > > unexpected
> > > > > > fails. I
> > > > > > > > > > think
> > > > > > > > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> is
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > better
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > than
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > changing writer to one with heavy
> > > > > > classloading.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Is it ok to restrict thin attributes
> > to
> > > > > > primitives
> > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> 'String'?
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > [1]
> > > > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12049
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> --
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> Best wishes,
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> Amelchev Nikita
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > > > > > Alexei Scherbakov
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Best wishes,
> > > > > > Amelchev Nikita
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > >
> > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > Alexei Scherbakov
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
