[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-10757?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15418409#comment-15418409
 ] 

Jitendra Nath Pandey commented on HDFS-10757:
---------------------------------------------

  I think storing the {{actualUgi}} in KMSClientProvider is incorrect because 
the providers are cached for a long time, and the currentUGI may be completely 
different from the actualUGI.  Therefore, it may be a good idea to consider 
removing actualUgi from KMSClientProvider. I am inclined to say that setting up 
of the UGI should be done by client code using the FileSystem. The 
KMSClientProvider on every call should only check following: If the currentUGI 
has a realUgi, us the realUgi as actualUgi or use the currentUgi as the 
actualUgi. 
  I may not have the whole context on why actualUgi was added in the 
constructor of KMSClientProvider, but would like to understand.

> KMSClientProvider combined with KeyProviderCache can result in wrong UGI 
> being used
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HDFS-10757
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-10757
>             Project: Hadoop HDFS
>          Issue Type: Bug
>            Reporter: Sergey Shelukhin
>            Priority: Critical
>
> ClientContext::get gets the context from CACHE via a config setting based 
> name, then KeyProviderCache stored in ClientContext gets the key provider 
> cached by URI from the configuration, too. These would return the same 
> KeyProvider regardless of current UGI.
> KMSClientProvider caches the UGI (actualUgi) in ctor; that means in 
> particular that all the users of DFS with KMSClientProvider in a process will 
> get the KMS token (along with other credentials) of the first user, via the 
> above cache.
> Either KMSClientProvider shouldn't store the UGI, or one of the caches should 
> be UGI-aware, like the FS object cache.
> Side note: the comment in createConnection that purports to handle the 
> different UGI doesn't seem to cover what it says it covers. In our case, we 
> have two unrelated UGIs with no auth (createRemoteUser) with bunch of tokens, 
> including a KMS token, added.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: hdfs-issues-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: hdfs-issues-h...@hadoop.apache.org

Reply via email to