On 9.6.2016 08:44, Fraser Tweedale wrote:
On Thu, Jun 09, 2016 at 01:21:29AM +1000, Fraser Tweedale wrote:
On Wed, Jun 08, 2016 at 01:00:36PM +0200, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 8.6.2016 05:15, Fraser Tweedale wrote:
On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 03:42:22PM +1000, Fraser Tweedale wrote:
On Wed, Jun 01, 2016 at 02:51:04PM +1000, Fraser Tweedale wrote:
This patchset implements the 'ca' plugin for creating and managing
lightweight sub-CAs, and updates the 'caacl' plugin and
'cert-request' command to support multiple CAs.
A brief overview of the patches:
'ca' plugin, associated schema changes and container objects,
Dogtag REST API wrapper
Add CA entry for the IPA CA on install/upgrade
Update 'caacl' plugin with CA support (including enforcement)
Update ra.request_certificate() to support specifying target CA
Add '--ca' option to 'cert-request' command
Add '--issuer' option to 'cert-find' command
These patches depend on other pending patches:
0051, 0052, 0053, 0054, 0055, 0056
Signing key replication depends on unmerged Dogtag patches. Builds
of Dogtag with the required patches, and of FreeIPA with all
completed sub-CAs work, should be available from my COPR soon:
Some parts of the design are not implemented in the current
- local parent CA (ipaca object) references
- sub-CA certificate renewal
- 'cert-show' command '--ca=NAME' option
- certmonger support for specifying CA
- revocation of deleted CAs
I look forward to your reviews!
Rebased and updated patches attached.
- add required attributes for issuer DN and subject DN
- prevent rename of IPA CA
- when adding IPA CA entry, contact Dogtag to learn authority id,
issuer DN and subject DN
- add 'read_ca' method to Dogtag interface
- tighten ACIs to prevent modification of ipacaid attribute
Updated patch 0064-3; adds --issuer option to cert-show and --ca
option to cert-show and cert-find.
1) On upgrade, why is the lightweight CA container created twice - once in
41-subca.update, once using ensure_entry() call? It should be done only
I'll remove 41-subca.update; the routine in cainstance is the one
2) In ca_del, every CA specified in args should be deleted, not just the
3) Do not use NonFatalError, issue a warning instead:
4) Can it actually happen that ca_show does not return ipacaid? I guess not,
so you should be able to remove the check altogether and don't bother with
ipacaid is mandatory now, so I'll remove the check.
Patch 0060-0062: LGTM
Could you please define the CA param as follows:
doc=_("CA to use"),
This is for consitency with framework-generated parent key params, which
unfortunately we cannot leverage in cert_request currently.
1) See my comment for patch 0063, it applies here as well.
2) The --issuer option should not be included in cert_show - show commands
are supposed to retrieve an object given primary key(s), and the primary key
of CA objects is just their cn.
The --issuer argument is because primary key for a cert is really
(issuer, serial). So it show the cert _with_ that issuer (and
serial), not the cert _for_ that issuer.
Correct, but in IPA the issuer is represented by the CA object, so in
IPA the primary key for a certificate is actually (CA name, serial).
Certificate lookup by issuer name and serial is actually a search
operation, analogical to how CA lookup by subject name is also a search
operation, so it should be done by cert-find.
3) In find commands, the options form a filter, so instead of raising
MutuallyExclusiveError in cert-find, return an empty result, as with any
other unmatched filter.
Here, --issuer and --ca are two different ways to specify the
issuer. --issuer lets you give the issuer DN straight up; --ca
takes the name of an IPA CA object and looks up its issuer DN.
(Thus it makes no sense to give both options at once).
That's one way to look at it, but it's true only if you assume that
cert-find can only search certificates in Dogtag. This will very soon
became untrue, as we will allow cert-find to also search certificates
anywhere in LDAP (the server part of ticket #5381). There, the
difference between the options would be that with --ca you search for
certificates issued by the specified managed CA, but with --issuer you
search for certificates with the given issuer name, be it managed CA or not.
For now, IMO the correct behavior should be that if both are specified
and the issuer name of the specified CA does not match the specified
issuer name, empty result is returned, otherwise carry on with the
search in Dogtag.
Do you think it would be clearer to provide a single option that
takes issuer DN or the name of CA? I considered this but decided
against it because collisions are possible (one could name an IPA CA
something that passes for a stingified DN).
Right, I would not do that.
Thanks for reviewing!
Updated patches attached (0059-3..0063-3, 0064-4). No substantive
changes to 0060..0062.
Manage your subscription for the Freeipa-devel mailing list:
Contribute to FreeIPA: http://www.freeipa.org/page/Contribute/Code