[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-4022?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16109588#comment-16109588
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on NIFI-4022:
--------------------------------------
GitHub user YolandaMDavis opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/2046
NIFI-4022 - Enabled SASL auth scheme/ACL support for Curator use
Enhancement allows user to enable SASL based ACL's for nodes created via
Curator for cluster management (e.g. leader election nodes, Cluster
Coordinator/Primary Nodes).
For testing would recommend the following actions:
1) Follow the updated administrator guide (included in PR as a separate
commit) for enabling kerberos on Zookeeper (external or embedded) and NiFi
2)Testing with nifi nodes where principals vary across servers. For
example nifi/[email protected] vs nifi/[email protected]. In this case the
kerberos.removeHostFromPrincipal would need to be true (in both
zookeeper.properties and nifi.properties) to ensure that the user will be
normalized as [email protected] for acls.
3) Ensuring leader election scenarios work as expected with acls in place
on the /nifi path (acl should be 'sasl', <user> cdrwa and 'world', anyone r).
Recommended scenario is removal of Cluster Coordinator from a cluster to ensure
new coordinator is elected.
Thank you for submitting a contribution to Apache NiFi.
In order to streamline the review of the contribution we ask you
to ensure the following steps have been taken:
### For all changes:
- [x] Is there a JIRA ticket associated with this PR? Is it referenced
in the commit message?
- [x] Does your PR title start with NIFI-XXXX where XXXX is the JIRA number
you are trying to resolve? Pay particular attention to the hyphen "-" character.
- [ ] Has your PR been rebased against the latest commit within the target
branch (typically master)?
- [ ] Is your initial contribution a single, squashed commit?
### For code changes:
- [ ] Have you ensured that the full suite of tests is executed via mvn
-Pcontrib-check clean install at the root nifi folder?
- [x] Have you written or updated unit tests to verify your changes?
- [ ] If adding new dependencies to the code, are these dependencies
licensed in a way that is compatible for inclusion under [ASF
2.0](http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-a)?
- [ ] If applicable, have you updated the LICENSE file, including the main
LICENSE file under nifi-assembly?
- [ ] If applicable, have you updated the NOTICE file, including the main
NOTICE file found under nifi-assembly?
- [ ] If adding new Properties, have you added .displayName in addition to
.name (programmatic access) for each of the new properties?
### For documentation related changes:
- [x] Have you ensured that format looks appropriate for the output in
which it is rendered?
### Note:
Please ensure that once the PR is submitted, you check travis-ci for build
issues and submit an update to your PR as soon as possible.
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com/YolandaMDavis/nifi NIFI-4022
Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/2046.patch
To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch
with (at least) the following in the commit message:
This closes #2046
----
commit 9e43229ed409527ffe3bab0b3bdb7584e64ce98e
Author: Yolanda M. Davis <[email protected]>
Date: 2017-07-31T17:27:48Z
NIFI-4022 - Initial update for SASL support for cluster management in
Zookeeper
commit 588a5ca995c46f94e893b249a787be7c8104e060
Author: Yolanda M. Davis <[email protected]>
Date: 2017-08-01T18:31:15Z
NIFI-4022 - adding sasl documentation update and update to test
----
> Use SASL Auth Scheme For Secured Zookeeper Client Interaction
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: NIFI-4022
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-4022
> Project: Apache NiFi
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 1.2.0
> Reporter: Yolanda M. Davis
> Assignee: Yolanda M. Davis
>
> NiFi uses Zookeeper to assist in cluster orchestration including leader
> elections for Primary Node and Cluster Coordinator and to store state for
> various processors (such as MonitorActivity). In secured Zookeeper
> environments (supported by SASL + Kerberos) NiFi should protect the zNodes it
> creates to prevent users or hosts, outside of a NiFi cluster, from accessing
> or modifying entries. In its current implementation security can be enforced
> for processors that store state information in Zookeeper, however zNodes used
> for managing Primary Node and Cluster Coordinator data are left open and
> susceptible to change from any user. Also when zNodes are secured for
> processor state, a “Creator Only” policy is used which allows the system to
> determine the identification of the NiFi node and protect any zNodes created
> with that node id using Zookeeper’s “auth” scheme. The challenge with this
> scheme is that it limits the ability for other NiFi nodes in the cluster to
> access that zNode if needed (since it is specifically binds that zNode to the
> unique id of its creator).
>
> To best protect zNodes created in Zookeeper by NiFi while maximizing NiFi’s
> ability to share information across the cluster I propose that we move to
> using Zookeeper’s SASL authentication scheme, which will allow the use of
> Kerberos principals for securing zNode with the appropriate permissions. For
> maximum flexibility, these principals can be mapped appropriately in
> Zookeeper, using auth-to-local rules, to ensure that nodes across the cluster
> can share zNodes as needed.
>
> Potential Concerns/Challenges for Discussion:
>
> 1) For existing NiFi users how will we migrate Zookeeper entries from
> the old security scheme to the new scheme?
> 2) How should zNodes be reverted to open if kerberos is disabled?
> 3) What will the performance impact be on the cluster once SASL scheme
> is enabled (since we’d be moving from open to protected)? Would require
> investigation
> 4) Currently users can control authentication scheme via state
> management configuration for processors yet not for clusters. Should we
> still maintain the practice of allowing schemes to be configurable for
> processors (with SASL being the new default)?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
