[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-5405?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15305242#comment-15305242
]
Adam B commented on MESOS-5405:
-------------------------------
[~tillt] I think I'm favoring [~alexr]'s approach of making subject and object
optional (to handle object-less requests, like ACCESS_MESOS_LOG), leaving their
values optional (to handle union-like objects), and then fixing all the
accesses to handle missing subject/object/value correctly.
But maybe missing object doesn't mean the same as a missing object.value (even
if the other fields are also missing). We could allow each action to define
whether or not it requires an object, since some like ACCESS_MESOS_LOG might
actually want to check that there is never an object set. And then, if the
action allows/requires an object, we can define an object with no fields set
(including no optional FrameworkInfo/ExecutorInfo/TaskInfo fields) as an ANY
object.
> Make fields in authorization::Request protobuf optional.
> --------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: MESOS-5405
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-5405
> Project: Mesos
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Alexander Rukletsov
> Assignee: Till Toenshoff
> Priority: Blocker
> Labels: mesosphere, security
> Fix For: 0.29.0
>
>
> Currently {{authorization::Request}} protobuf declares {{subject}} and
> {{object}} as required fields. However, in the codebase we not always set
> them, which renders the message in the uninitialized state, for example:
> *
> https://github.com/apache/mesos/blob/0bfd6999ebb55ddd45e2c8566db17ab49bc1ffec/src/common/http.cpp#L603
> *
> https://github.com/apache/mesos/blob/0bfd6999ebb55ddd45e2c8566db17ab49bc1ffec/src/master/http.cpp#L2057
> I believe that the reason why we don't see issues related to this is because
> we never send authz requests over the wire, i.e., never serialize/deserialize
> them. However, they are still invalid protobuf messages. Moreover, some
> external authorizers may serialize these messages.
> We can either ensure all required fields are set or make both {{subject}} and
> {{object}} fields optional. This will also require updating local authorizer,
> which should properly handle the situation when these fields are absent. We
> may also want to notify authors of external authorizers to update their code
> accordingly.
> It looks like no deprecation is necessary, mainly because we
> already—erroneously!—treat these fields as optional.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
