This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:

(Updated May 11, 2016, 10:08 p.m.)

Review request for Ambari, Di Li and Richard Zang.

Bugs: AMBARI-15552

Repository: ambari


Reproduction Steps:
1. Go to Admin->Manage Ambari
2. Create a group with a few users belonging to it. 
    (I have created "mygroup" with "user1", "user2", "user3") 
    (attachments "user1.tiff", "mygroup.tiff" shows samples)
3. Go to Clusters->Roles on the left navigation menu.
4. The default view is the "Block" view for the roles. Assign "mygroup" a role, 
say "Cluster User". 
    (attachment "block_view_original.tiff")
5. Click on "List" view, it will show Users by default. It correctly shows the 
role "Cluster User" for each user in "mygroup". 
    (attachment "list_view_users.tiff")
6. Now, try adding a new Role, say "Service Operator", to one of the users, say 
    (attachments "list_view_add_role_to_user_step1.tiff", 
7. After making this change, the role gets added for that user (in our case 
"user3"), but the roles from other users in its group gets removed. Also, the 
previous role for the user ("user3") is replaced by the new Role.
    (attachment "list_view_add_role_to_user_step3.tiff")
8. You can confirm this from the the "Block" view. 
    (attachment "block_view_after_step3.tiff")

So, the problem here lies with the List view where it is not able to process 
the changes in the Roles correctly. A change in the Role of a user causes the 

CASE-1: The displayed role (effective privilege) comes from an explicitly 
assigned role to the user.
1.1) The new selected role correctly replaces the existing privilege that was 
explicitly assigned to the user.
1.2) But if the user was assigned multiple roles explicilty (before the fix for 
AMBARI-16102 got pushed in), then all the other roles, which are of lower 
privilege than the role that got replaced, are still displayed in the Block 
view (because those roles are still in the database). So, if the new selected 
role happened to be of a lower privilege than and existing role of the user, 
then even though the user sees a success Alert message, the effective privileg 
he sees is different. For the Ambari user, this behavior is not easily 

CASE-2: The displayed role (effective privilege) comes from a group the user 
belongs to.
2.1) If the new selected privilege is higher than the effective privilege 
coming from the user's group(s), then the newly selected role replaces this 
"group" privilege in the database, insetad of creating a new entry.
2.2) As a result of losing the group privilege, all the group members also lose 
their privileges and they show "None" as their effective privilege.
2.3) If the newly selected privilege is lower than effective group privilege, 
the Alert message shows a success of role change but the effective privilge is 
still not the one that the Ambari user selected.

Expected results:
1. Updating a Role of a user must replace any/all of the explicit roles it has 
been assigned through the Block View. (this addresses 1.2)
Note: Even though AMBARI-16102 has attempted to fix the Block view by allowing 
only a user to have just one role assigned to it, there could be cases where 
the earlier version of Block view has already allowed users to have multiple 
roles. So, taking this into consideration, the fix must address removing any or 
all of the roles the user was assigned explicitly.
2. Adding a Role to a user must not affect the Roles of other users in its 
group. (addressing 2.1 and 2.2)
3. Selecting a "NONE" for a user role shows the Alert "User's role chnaged to 
None". This  may not reflect the correct privilege status as the user might 
have some effective privilege coming from its group(s). In the fix, the Alert 
must show the relevant message.
4. Alert messages must show more informative messages of what is happening with 
the user's privileges and why. (addressing 1.2 and 2.3)



Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/46808/diff/


The testing done mainly checks the logic used to update the privileges of the 
user/group which is done after a REST call to retrieve the privileges.

The test cases have mocks setup for server calls. The response from the server 
calls are also mocked to work with a particular set of users and groups.

The logic in the .then() clause following the server calls is added in the mock 
promises and tweaked slightly to work locally.

The role selection for Users is tested for:
1. the new selected role has the same privilege as the user's effective 
privilege coming from its gruop(s)
2. the new selected role has greater privilege than the user's effective 
privilege coming from its group(s)
3. the new selected role has lower privilege tha n the user's effective 
privilege coming from its group(s)

The role selection for Groups is tested for:
1. the new selected role has the same privilege as the group's effective 
2. the new selected role has greater privilege than the group's effective 
3. the new selected role has lower privilege than the group's effective 

File Attachments (updated)



Keta Patel

Reply via email to