I do not understand the proposed security benefit of using github for user authentication over using Jenkins permissions directly. Keep in mind that preventing non-+2ed commits from being run is an orthogonal question - this can be configured with any user authentication method.
On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 1:52 PM, Bharath Vissapragada <[email protected]> wrote: > That was just for configuring the gerrit trigger. Regarding auth > integration, I read this page. Does it not work? > > https://wiki.jenkins-ci.org/display/JENKINS/GitHub+OAuth+Plugin#GitHubOAuthPlugin-AboutGitHubAuthenticationPlugin > > On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 1:50 PM, Jim Apple <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I think you're misunderstanding that plugin. It does not associate >> Jenkins login with gerrit login. >> >> On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 1:45 PM, Bharath Vissapragada >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 1:38 PM, Alex Behm <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > >> >> That integration sounds like a great idea to me. >> >> >> >> Just to clarify the purpose: We'd like external contributors to be able >> to >> >> run private build+test runs during development, and not just run GVO >> once >> >> the patch has +2. The hard part is gettig the patch to +2 in the first >> >> place and we've seen instances where relying on local test runs only >> can be >> >> difficult. >> >> >> >> For example, contributors could upload a draft to gerrit and run a >> private >> >> build to fix problems before publishing the patch fir review. >> >> >> > >> > As per this [1] link, I think that can be configured. I haven't tried it >> > myself, but from the looks of it, it seems plausible. >> > >> > [1] >> > https://wiki.jenkins-ci.org/display/JENKINS/Gerrit+ >> Trigger#GerritTrigger-TriggerConfiguration >> > >> > >> >> >> >> On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 1:33 PM, Bharath Vissapragada < >> >> [email protected] >> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> > Just wondering why we can't link Jenkins authentication with gerrit >> login >> >> > in this case instead of having two separate login credentials. That >> way >> >> we >> >> > can retain the audit trail of the jobs and also isolate Jenkins to >> only >> >> run >> >> > code thats approved (+2ed) over gerrit. With this, any new contributor >> >> > (whoever has signed up on gerrit) can have access to the jenkins box >> and >> >> we >> >> > can be sure that they only run the stuff that is approved by >> committers. >> >> > Thoughts? >> >> > >> >> > * I'm not totally sure if such an integration is possible but I did a >> >> quick >> >> > search and I got a feeling that shouldn't be difficult. >> >> > >> >> > On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 1:18 PM, Taras Bobrovytsky < >> >> > [email protected]> wrote: >> >> > >> >> > > I would be more in favor of starting with open access instead of >> having >> >> > to >> >> > > hand out credentials. It's both less work for us and it makes it >> easier >> >> > to >> >> > > contribute. If we notice that this is not working well, or gets >> abused, >> >> > we >> >> > > can switch to what Tim is suggesting. Also, we should be able to see >> >> who >> >> > is >> >> > > using our Jenkins by looking at Gerrit (because the patch must be >> >> > uploaded >> >> > > to Gerrit before starting a build). >> >> > > >> >> > > On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 10:57 AM, Alex Behm <[email protected] >> > >> >> > > wrote: >> >> > > >> >> > > > I'm fine with Tim's approach, but it does add some friction to >> >> > > > contributions. >> >> > > > >> >> > > > On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 9:57 AM, Tim Armstrong < >> >> > [email protected]> >> >> > > > wrote: >> >> > > > >> >> > > > > I mean the contributor could email an email address (e.g. a >> mailing >> >> > > list) >> >> > > > > asking for credentials and we could email them privately. >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > Do we know what other Apache projects do for situations like >> this? >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 9:18 AM, Alex Behm < >> [email protected] >> >> > >> >> > > > wrote: >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > > Can you clarify the "credentials by mailing list" approach? >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > If we send out the credentials on a public list, it's pretty >> >> close >> >> > to >> >> > > > > open >> >> > > > > > access. >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > If we send out credentials to contributors privately, we have >> an >> >> > > > > additional >> >> > > > > > hurdle to contributions. >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 9:12 AM, Tim Armstrong < >> >> > > > [email protected]> >> >> > > > > > wrote: >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > Got it. >> >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > I think I'd probably be more in favour of handing out login >> >> > > > credential >> >> > > > > to >> >> > > > > > > contributors on demand (e.g. by mailing a list) rather than >> >> > having >> >> > > > > open >> >> > > > > > > access, just so we have a clearer idea of who's using it. I >> >> don't >> >> > > > have >> >> > > > > a >> >> > > > > > > strong objection to the alternative. >> >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 8:52 AM, Jim Apple < >> >> [email protected] >> >> > > >> >> > > > > wrote: >> >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > How isolated is the Jenkins instance? >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > As far as I know, the workers have little access to the >> >> > > > coordinator. >> >> > > > > > See >> >> > > > > > > > here: >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > https://wiki.jenkins-ci.org/display/JENKINS/Slave+To+ >> >> > > > > > > Master+Access+Control >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > This flag is on and there are no whitelisted exceptions. >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > Does the jenkins user have many privileges on the VM? >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > They have passwordless sudo on the worker >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > Could it simply wipe >> >> > > > > > > > > out the job history to destroy the trail? >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > Job history is stored on the coordinator. >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > Jenkins also presumably has >> >> > > > > > > > > credentials to make at least some changes to gerrit - >> are >> >> > those >> >> > > > > > > > privileges >> >> > > > > > > > > restrictive enough that it couldn't cause problems there >> >> too? >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > Those are stored only on the coordinator and cannot be >> used >> >> by >> >> > > the >> >> > > > > > > slaves. >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> >>
