-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/73443/#review223240
-----------------------------------------------------------


Fix it, then Ship it!





agents-common/src/main/java/org/apache/ranger/plugin/policyengine/RangerPolicyEngineImpl.java
Lines 700 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/73443/#comment312329>

    Is the 'if' in #700 necessary? When allowResult is null, 
deniedAccessTypeCount will always be allAccessDefs.size(), right?


- Madhan Neethiraj


On July 17, 2021, 2:25 a.m., Abhay Kulkarni wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/73443/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated July 17, 2021, 2:25 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for ranger, Madhan Neethiraj, Ramesh Mani, Sailaja Polavarapu, 
> and Velmurugan Periasamy.
> 
> 
> Bugs: RANGER-3329
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RANGER-3329
> 
> 
> Repository: ranger
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Currently a request for _any access-type is denied only if all access-types 
> in the service-def are denied by policies. Instead of this, the policy-engine 
> should deny _any access if there are no allowed accesses, and at least one of 
> the access-type is denied. This will help address following usecase:
> 
> when accessTypeRestrictions is defined on a resource i.e. only a subset of 
> access-types are shown in policy-UI, it will not be possible to create 
> policies that deny all accesses. In such cases, the proposed change will 
> enable denying _any access-type with only subset of access-types denied.
> 
> The fix is to deny the access with type _any only if all of access-types 
> "specified in the denying policy" are explicitly denied by policies.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   
> agents-common/src/main/java/org/apache/ranger/plugin/policyengine/RangerAccessRequestImpl.java
>  74a7a2615 
>   
> agents-common/src/main/java/org/apache/ranger/plugin/policyengine/RangerPolicyEngineImpl.java
>  3c0e32c2e 
>   
> agents-common/src/main/java/org/apache/ranger/plugin/policyevaluator/RangerDefaultPolicyEvaluator.java
>  03e37fe3d 
>   
> agents-common/src/main/java/org/apache/ranger/plugin/util/RangerAccessRequestUtil.java
>  696a3f6eb 
>   
> agents-common/src/test/java/org/apache/ranger/plugin/policyengine/TestPolicyACLs.java
>  f8eba5f96 
>   
> agents-common/src/test/resources/policyengine/test_policyengine_descendant_tags.json
>  934655ba9 
>   agents-common/src/test/resources/policyengine/test_policyengine_hive.json 
> bd2f67b68 
>   
> agents-common/src/test/resources/policyengine/test_policyengine_tag_hive.json 
> a8ec02733 
>   
> agents-common/src/test/resources/policyengine/test_policyengine_tag_hive_for_show_databases.json
>  f42df3eab 
> 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/73443/diff/3/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Passed all existing test cases.
> Created a unit test for the use-case outlined in the JIRA, and ensured that 
> it passes.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Abhay Kulkarni
> 
>

Reply via email to