Agreed, I think we should look for better integrations into other projects
like FreeIPA, so users can easily do this. A authentication
infrastructure project like FreeIPA will always do a better job than we
could do imo

Sean

On Tuesday, 13 September 2016, Stephen Benjamin <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Marek Hulán" <[email protected] <javascript:;>>
> > To: [email protected] <javascript:;>
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 10:13:45 AM
> > Subject: Re: [foreman-dev] Using certificates for SSH access
> >
> > Hello
> >
> > some comments below
> >
> > On Tuesday 13 of September 2016 08:51:12 Ohad Levy wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I was looking at [1] which talks about how to leverage a CA for
> managing
> > > SSH access, and I thought it could be interesting for REX and
> potentially
> > > for foreman to manage.
> > >
> > > In the post, they describe how they create different principles
> (groups -
> > > think hostgroups) for access, generating certificates with expatriation
> > > etc.
> > >
> > > Since we already have some of the certificate handling code (puppet ca,
> > > pulp / katello certs) I wonder if it make sense to generalize it and
> offer
> > > SSH certificates (and their management and possible an auditing system
> for
> > > their usage) offering?
> >
> > I was thinking about this earlier, the major benefit I see is that in
> case we
> > change the key that Foreman uses we wouldn't have to update all hosts.
> Since
> > we currently only install it during provisioning it might be very
> helpful.
> > OTOH we should also provide puppet module that would configure this key
> so
> > there's easy way to update it also for unmanaged hosts. Then the CA
> might not
> > have that many benefits, we'd have to distribute the CA pub key instead
> of
> > the
> > main pub key. Probably the biggest benefit would be the key expiration.
> >
> > If we decide to generalize the CA handling I'd first look if we could use
> > something existing, e.g. FreeIPA. Maybe we could provide our simple
> backend
> > too but I'd like to avoid building our own CA on top ssh-keygen :-) I'd
> also
> > like to keep it in separate plugin - probably rex.
>
>
> The CA use with ssh-keygen is a neat idea, but FreeIPA does some great
> things
> that I'd rather not have us have to deal with.  The Facebook article
> towards
> the end evens offers warnings about the lack of any kind of revocation
> scheme.
>
> FreeIPA can do that, and handles it quite gracefully.  If a smart proxy key
> gets compromised, you can just remove it from authorized keys in FreeIPA
> and it propagates everywhere automatically.
>
> And we could even go further with FreeIPA and not have to deal with SSH
> keys
> at all and go the kerberos route, which handles access controls, key
> revocation,
> expiration, etc all very nicely.  We have an RFE for that[1].
>
>
> - Stephen
>
> [1] http://projects.theforeman.org/issues/11936
>
>
> > --
> > Marek
> >
> > >
> > > Ohad
> > >
> > > [1]
> > > https://code.facebook.com/posts/365787980419535/
> scalable-and-secure-access-w
> > > ith-ssh/
> >
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "foreman-dev" group.
> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> > email to [email protected] <javascript:;>.
> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
> >
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "foreman-dev" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected] <javascript:;>.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"foreman-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to