On Thu, Mar 13, 2025 at 4:54 PM Dave Page <dp...@pgadmin.org> wrote:
> > > On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 at 11:07, Aditya Toshniwal < > aditya.toshni...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > >> Hi Dave, >> >> On Thu, Mar 13, 2025 at 4:27 PM Dave Page <dp...@pgadmin.org> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 at 10:26, Aditya Toshniwal < >>> aditya.toshni...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Dave, >>>> >>>> On Thu, Mar 13, 2025 at 3:36 PM Dave Page <dp...@pgadmin.org> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 at 06:16, Aditya Toshniwal < >>>>> aditya.toshni...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi Hackers, >>>>>> >>>>>> I have started looking into a feature where users have requested for >>>>>> custom roles. The roles can then be assigned permissions. Here's what I >>>>>> think how it can be done: >>>>>> >>>>>> 1. Create a framework for roles based access control. >>>>>> 2. Allow adding/editing/deleting roles from UI. >>>>>> 3. User management dialog can be converted to a tab to get extra >>>>>> space for other stuff. >>>>>> 4. pgAdmin can have some predefined permissions. The permissions >>>>>> can then be used to validate at the API levels and UI. >>>>>> 5. New permissions cannot be added from UI as it will require >>>>>> code changes. They can be added based on user requests. >>>>>> 6. Admin can allow these permissions to the roles and roles can >>>>>> be assigned to users. >>>>>> 7. Permissions will be used to >>>>>> 8. Admin role remains static with no changes allowed. >>>>>> >>>>>> Let me know your thoughts on this. If everything looks good then I >>>>>> will proceed. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> What permissions would we support initially? >>>>> >>>> >>>> Based on https://github.com/pgadmin-org/pgadmin4/issues/7310, we can >>>> start with not allowing users to register a server. We'll start 1 or 2 may >>>> be, the intention is to create a framework which will allow us to keep >>>> adding permissions on future requests. >>>> >>> >>> The reason I ask is that there's no point in creating a framework if we >>> just end up with a single permission for adding/removing servers. I think >>> it makes sense to be sure there are likely to be other permissions before >>> committing to something likely to be a lot more complex than just adding an >>> attribute to a user. >>> >> >> I understand, but there have been many user requests for custom roles. I >> agree that adding a complex thing like RBAC just for one single permission >> is an overkill. But based on my past experience - users will come up with >> more permissions once they see that they can tweak the permissions now. >> What do you suggest we can do? >> > > I do agree, there is the possibility for additional roles to come up, > however, I'm struggling to think what makes sense right now. RBAC access to > tools like psql or the Query Tool don't make much sense - if you can login > to the database server, then there's nothing to stop you just running psql > anyway and bypassing any RBAC we might implement. I suppose there might be > an argument that pgAdmin is being used as a "gateway" to a server on an > otherwise inaccessible network, but then I worry that that opens a whole > other can of worms around locking down ways for users to execute queries > through pgAdmin that we might never have previously considered to be a > problem. > > You say there have been many user requests for custom roles. What roles > were they asking for? > Roles similar to what Grafana provides https://grafana.com/docs/grafana/latest/administration/roles-and-permissions/, but majorly restrictions around server nodes. > -- > Dave Page > pgAdmin: https://www.pgadmin.org > PostgreSQL: https://www.postgresql.org > pgEdge: https://www.pgedge.com > > -- Thanks, Aditya Toshniwal pgAdmin Hacker | Sr. Staff SDE II | *enterprisedb.com* <https://www.enterprisedb.com/> "Don't Complain about Heat, Plant a TREE"
