-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/18730/#review42577
-----------------------------------------------------------

Ship it!



src/authorizer/authorizer.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/18730/#comment76378>

    Run mesos-style.py. ;-)



src/authorizer/authorizer.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/18730/#comment76379>

    The caveat with this one is that two different ACLs might satisfy this 
request in aggregate. Consider these ACLs:
    
    users: [ benh ]
    action: http_get
    urls: [ /secret ]
    
    users: [ vinod ]
    action: http_get
    urls: [ /secret ]
    
    And now this request:
    
    users: [ benh, vinod ]
    action: http_get
    urls: [ /secret ]
    
    So if we aren't going to do any aggregation then we need to call this out 
explicitly in the documentation (and add a TODO to relax this after we add 
aggregation). But to be perfectly honest, I don't think this kind of 
aggregation is that difficult.



src/authorizer/authorizer.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/18730/#comment76380>

    mesos-style.py



src/authorizer/authorizer.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/18730/#comment76381>

    For the SOME cases, by "every element is allowed" I think using the phrase 
"the request values are a subset of the ACL values" might be helpful for people 
to understand the logic (same goes for the logic in 'matches' too).
    
    Also, this suffers from the same fate as above with respect to 
disaggregated ACLs.



src/tests/authorization_tests.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/18730/#comment76383>

    Tests all look great! Can we also add some tests that handle the 
aggregation case to capture our intended semantics please? Thanks!



src/tests/authorization_tests.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/18730/#comment76382>

    principal


- Benjamin Hindman


On May 9, 2014, 6:22 a.m., Vinod Kone wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/18730/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated May 9, 2014, 6:22 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Adam B, Benjamin Hindman, and Niklas Nielsen.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-911
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-911
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos-git
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> See summary.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   include/mesos/mesos.proto a5826d7d732b32b31802b3ed9a1e34b234bea061 
>   src/Makefile.am f461a1515e7bafac677f2d0bcdd499f57ba3f029 
>   src/authorizer/authorizer.hpp PRE-CREATION 
>   src/tests/authorization_tests.cpp PRE-CREATION 
>   src/tests/master_contender_detector_tests.cpp 
> 42051bfc7c698e2e80cfe23686ee11ef722b679e 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/18730/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> make check
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Vinod Kone
> 
>

Reply via email to