Hi Dmitri,

+1 on catalog-level skipSasTokenGeneration / skipCredentialDownscoping
flags, along the same lines as stsUnavailable. Now that SKIP is no
longer a mainstream knob, that feels like the right home for "don't
vend".

I'll send a prerequisite PR for those flags first, including
DefaultAccessDelegationModeResolver as Ayush suggested. After that,
#5756 [1] can drop the bag-based skip.

Thanks,
Vignesh

[1] https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/5756

On Fri, 23 Oct 2026 at 23:45, Dmitri Bourlatchkov <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> As discovered during the review of PR 5756 [1], now
> that SKIP_CREDENTIAL_SUBSCOPING_INDIRECTION is not recommended for
> mainstream use [3], deployments (e.g. tests) using non-cloud options for
> ADLS and GS (GCS) storage need a mechanism for opting out of minting
> session tokens and resolving to local (server and/or client) credentials
> for storage access.
>
> I propose adding the following properties at the Management API level [1].
>
> * AzureStorageConfigInfo.skipSasTokenGeneration
>
> * GcpStorageConfigInfo.skipCredentialDownscoping
>
> Both names relate to the corresponding native APIs in each technology.
>
> Setting these properties will effectively disable credential vending. This
> is similar to stsUnavailable in AwsStorageConfigInfo.
>
> The main purpose of the new properties is establishing a catalog-level opt
> in/out mechanism and providing well-defined user-level settings.
>
> PolarisStorageIntegration implementations still retain value without
> credential vending because they potentially define non-credential
> properties in StorageAccessConfig. The latter case currently applies only
> to S3, but downstream customizations may utilize it too.
>
> [1] https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/5756#discussion_r4362688654
>
> [2]
>
> https://github.com/apache/polaris/blob/5fafc67a832a8900fefb399abc00549d864470d6/spec/polaris-management-service.yml#L21
>
> [3] https://lists.apache.org/thread/1trcnbm04zzqztpxkzrzs1pvrlyd49bg
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Thanks,
> Dmitri.
>

Reply via email to