Yes, this is super interesting. Thanks!
On 01/06/16 10:58, James Beedy wrote: > I've "conjured-up" what I think would be a great enhancement to the current > user mgmt capability in 2.0. > > As things stand, one can add a user to a model, and set a permission category > of either read (read), or write (read/write). This functionality is awesome, > and a huge step for juju (applause)!!!!! > > Admins of juju can now create, manage, and maintain the users and users > access policy associated with a model (applause, again, seriously). > > As a logical next step, why don't we take the user all the way to the > instance? > > What I'm thinking of is an '--os' flag that could be specified on user > creation! > > This flag would signify that the user need be created on the instances in the > current model. Ssh keys key(s) for a user could be added, and *associated*, > and provisioned alongside the respective user, and user account on the > machine. > > This functionality would give juju deployed infrastructure a huge edge in the > ease of user management/maintainability for any organization, and massive > bragging rights in enterprise land due to the increased PCI compliance > revolving around finer granularity in user access accounts. > > I feel like the majority of the big pieces are already In place, the primary > road blocks I foresee (probably a lot more): > 1. User sensitive ssh-keys > 2. Machine-level user provisioning template /UserManagerModel > 3. Os-level user access/permission policy (what is generic/default yet tuned > and hardened?) > > > That about wraps it up, hopefully I got my point across to some degree. > > Thoughts? > > > -- Juju mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju
