-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/70499/#review214912
-----------------------------------------------------------




agents-common/src/main/java/org/apache/ranger/plugin/policyengine/RangerPolicyEngineCache.java
Lines 68 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/70499/#comment301199>

    ```java
    ServicePolicies updatedServicePolicies = policies;
                                                        if (zoneStore != null) {
                                                                Map<String, 
RangerSecurityZone.RangerSecurityZoneService> securityZones = 
zoneStore.getSecurityZonesForService(serviceName);
                                                                if 
(MapUtils.isNotEmpty(securityZones)) {
                                                                        
updatedServicePolicies = getUpdatedServicePoliciesForZones(policies, 
securityZones);
                                                                }
                                                        }
    ```
    
    => This part of code snippet is common within if ... else if.. .Is it 
possible to shift out or move to some method?



agents-common/src/main/java/org/apache/ranger/plugin/policyengine/RangerPolicyEngineCache.java
Lines 148 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/70499/#comment301200>

    securityZoneInfo.setContainsAssociatedTagService(false);
    
    Just wanted to check we are explicitly setting over here and why not in 
below else block.



agents-common/src/main/java/org/apache/ranger/plugin/policyengine/RangerPolicyEngineCache.java
Lines 154 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/70499/#comment301201>

    ret.setTagPolicies(servicePolicies.getTagPolicies())
    
    Just wanted to check we are explicitly setting over here and why not in 
below else block.


- bhavik patel


On April 17, 2019, 10:55 p.m., Abhay Kulkarni wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/70499/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated April 17, 2019, 10:55 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for ranger, bhavik patel, Madhan Neethiraj, and Ramesh Mani.
> 
> 
> Bugs: RANGER-2404
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RANGER-2404
> 
> 
> Repository: ranger
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> If user is marked as a delegated administrator for a resource by a policy 
> associated with a zone, then he/she is able to manipulate another policy 
> targeted to the same resource but not associated with any zone.
> 
> When security zones exist in Ranger admin, Ranger policies in 
> service-policies object used to build policy engine are grouped under their 
> respective security zones. For the delegate admin processing policy engine 
> built within Ranger admin process, service policies were not partitioned into 
> zones. This caused ALL policies to be considered for delegate admin 
> processing.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   
> agents-common/src/main/java/org/apache/ranger/plugin/policyengine/RangerPolicyEngineCache.java
>  c1a797791 
>   
> agents-common/src/main/java/org/apache/ranger/plugin/policyengine/RangerPolicyEngineCacheForEngineOptions.java
>  ca6a2a395 
>   
> agents-common/src/main/java/org/apache/ranger/plugin/policyengine/RangerPolicyEngineImpl.java
>  be256a9ba 
>   security-admin/src/main/java/org/apache/ranger/rest/ServiceREST.java 
> 6ddb35953 
> 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/70499/diff/1/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Created a policy ("policy-1") under a zone ("zone-1") which granted a user 
> ("user1") delegate admin privilege.
> Created another policy ("policy-2") with same policy-resources as "policy-1" 
> for another user ("user2") and with no delegate admin privilege under 
> "unzoned" zone.
> 
> Logged into Ranger as user "user1" and ensured that for "unzoned" zone, 
> "policy-2" was not visible.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Abhay Kulkarni
> 
>

Reply via email to