Gary Winiger wrote:
>> Summary of the concerns and proposed solutions for the PSARC 2007/414:
>>
>> Concern:  Does clear text CHAP secret provides enough security?
>>     
>
>       I'm going to leave this one for now to get a feeling of others.
>
>   
>> Concern:  The iSCSI target manifest does not comply with SMF authorization.
>> Proposal:
>>         -We will add action_authorization and value_authorization to the 
>> manifest to make
>>          it SMF authorization compliant.
>>     
>
>       Good.  Is there an updated spec showing this? 
I updated the scf_design doc with a section on "Iscsi Target RBAC 
authorization".
>  Some how, I've
>       missed the FMRI and man pages documenting it.  Shouldn't this
>       turn iscsitadm into being completely authorization driven? ;-)
>   
No authorization is needed for iscsitadm, the cli sends the request to 
the daemon and
the daemon verify the user credential.   I don't think update to the man 
page is needed.
>       It would be nice to see the updated man page.
>
>   
>> Issues:
>>     -The CHAP secret will be  put back after PSARC 2007/177 is putback.  
>> The PSARC 2007/414 will
>>      cover the  putback of the CHAP secret at a later time, and no 
>> additional case is needed.
>>     
>
>       I'm not sure how to read this.  Is this accepting a case dependency
>       on 2007/177?  Or is it saying that a two phase project is being
>       requested.  Phase 1 without CHAP, phase 2 after 177 with CHAP.
>   
We are requesting to make this a 2 phase project, and we will provide 
all the documents to
address both phases.  The 2nd phase will accept the 2007/177 dependency.

> Gary..
>   

Reply via email to