Hello Justin,

First off, the current implementation of Barbican only supports one encrypted 
payload per secret record. We plan to revisit this once we begin work on the 
SSL certificate processing features.

As for the Barbican API, please note that the latest Barbican API is located 
here: 
https://github.com/cloudkeep/barbican/wiki/Application-Programming-Interface

As detailed in this wiki page, the current implementation of Barbican utilizes 
an 'Accept' request header to indicate to the Barbican service which media type 
to return the secret in. If 'application/json' is provided, only the secret's 
metadata is returned (i.e. nothing is decrypted). Alternate 'Accept' types may 
then be used to decrypted and return the secret, such as 
'application/octet-stream' from binary secret types, and 'text/plain' for text 
based secrets.

Effectively these are different representations of the same REST-ful secret 
resource, which we believe is an acceptable (no pun intended) use of the 
'Accept' header, but open for further debate.

That said, we did encounter an issue related to the 'Accept-Encoding' request 
header. We had hoped to use this header to indicate if (for example) a binary 
secret should be returned as 'base64' encoded versus raw binary data. We found 
the ability to override this header from default was problematic on Chrome, so 
decided to hold off on this feature for now. Curiously one option discussed was 
to add a '/base64' extension to the URI. Hence this feature could similarly be 
open for debate.

BTW, we do have a Python client library available for interaction with Barbican 
as well: https://github.com/cloudkeep/python-barbicanclient

Thanks,
John







________________________________
From: Justin Santa Barbara [jus...@fathomdb.com]
Sent: Sunday, September 22, 2013 2:25 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List
Subject: [openstack-dev] [Barbican] MIME types vs path (secrets/{id}/{name})

As part of my project to add a second implementation of the OpenStack API, I'm 
implementing Barbican, and I'm struggling to understand the motivations behind 
the API spec.

The API supports storing multiple secrets under a given key, the canonical 
example for that being SSL keys which comprise a certificate/public key and a 
private key.  That makes sense.

But, to set or retrieve the "sub-secrets", the MIME type of the request is 
used.  'application/json' is special and retrieves the metadata.

Wouldn't it be much easier just to use a path ( i.e. .../secrets/{id}/{name} ), 
rather than using MIME types?  Using MIME types seems very un-RESTy, but I'll 
leave that argument to the REST police :-)

It seems much more complicated to use MIME types, so I'm betting there's a good 
reason.  Can someone from the Barbican team share what those are?

(The API ref I'm looking at is here: 
https://github.com/cloudkeep/barbican/wiki/Blueprint%3A-MIME-Type-Revamp )

Justin

---

Justin Santa Barbara
Founder, FathomDB
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Reply via email to