Alexey Serbin has posted comments on this change. ( 
http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/12919 )

Change subject: sentry: sanitize and parse privileges from Sentry
......................................................................


Patch Set 3:

(7 comments)

http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/12919/3/src/kudu/master/sentry_authz_provider-test.cc
File src/kudu/master/sentry_authz_provider-test.cc:

http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/12919/3/src/kudu/master/sentry_authz_provider-test.cc@132
PS3, Line 132: Why just the server? This guarantees that a request for any
             :   // authorizable scope will ignore such invalid privileges.
Yes, I understand the reasoning here: the responses are from real Sentry 
instance, and that's about end-to-end verification.

What do you think about adding sort of unit test for 
SentryPrivilegeIsWellFormed() (currently file-scope-private of 
sentry_authz_provider.cc) where the fields of TSentryPrivilege are being messed 
up mercilessly?


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/12919/3/src/kudu/master/sentry_authz_provider-test.cc@171
PS3, Line 171:     :
style nit: it seems the indent should be four spaces; a space after the column 
is needed


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/12919/3/src/kudu/master/sentry_authz_provider-test.cc@264
PS3, Line 264:   static const vector<InvalidPrivilege> kInvalidPrivileges = {
             :       InvalidPrivilege::INCORRECT_ACTION,
             :       InvalidPrivilege::INCORRECT_SCOPE,
             :       InvalidPrivilege::INCORRECT_SERVER,
             :       InvalidPrivilege::FLIPPED_FIELD,
             :   };
syntax sugar addict's nit: could it be just

static constexpr InvalidPrivilege kInvalidPrivileges[] = {
...
};

?


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/12919/3/src/kudu/master/sentry_authz_provider.h
File src/kudu/master/sentry_authz_provider.h:

http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/12919/3/src/kudu/master/sentry_authz_provider.h@87
PS3, Line 87: the privileges apply.
> I'm not sure I understand what 'apply' means in this context.  So, maybe ch
Whoops, it should have been '... the user is granted privileges on ...'


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/12919/3/src/kudu/master/sentry_authz_provider.cc
File src/kudu/master/sentry_authz_provider.cc:

http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/12919/3/src/kudu/master/sentry_authz_provider.cc@325
PS3, Line 325: SentryPrivilegeIsWellFormed
Why not

IsSentryPrivilegeWellFormed(...) ?


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/12919/3/src/kudu/master/sentry_authz_provider.cc@463
PS3, Line 463:       continue;
Do you think it's worth logging a message in that case?  Maybe LOG(INFO) or at 
least VLOG(1) ?


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/12919/3/src/kudu/sentry/sentry_action.h
File src/kudu/sentry/sentry_action.h:

http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/12919/3/src/kudu/sentry/sentry_action.h@53
PS3, Line 53:    ALL,
Not from this particular changelist, but while you are at it: maybe, move ALL 
closer to OWNER (e.g. insert it between 'DROP' and 'OWNER')?



--
To view, visit http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/12919
To unsubscribe, visit http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/settings

Gerrit-Project: kudu
Gerrit-Branch: master
Gerrit-MessageType: comment
Gerrit-Change-Id: Ib6de6814f99abfbee4f030298b74f21f4e7c729b
Gerrit-Change-Number: 12919
Gerrit-PatchSet: 3
Gerrit-Owner: Andrew Wong <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Alexey Serbin <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Kudu Jenkins (120)
Gerrit-Reviewer: Tidy Bot (241)
Gerrit-Comment-Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2019 02:18:11 +0000
Gerrit-HasComments: Yes

Reply via email to