Andre,

Which version of Apache NiFi are you using?

In 0.x authorities are defined using the string that is returned from the
authenticator so there should be no issue here.

In 1.x users are entered by hand either through the UI or in the
authorizers.xml file (for the initial admin). This value must match the
value that the authenticator is returning or the result of
any nifi.security.identity.mapping you may have configured. If you're
unsure what value the authenticator has returned, the identity string will
be printed in the logs/nifi-user.log when authorization fails.

Let me know if this helps.

Matt

On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 10:46 AM, Andre <[email protected]> wrote:

> All,
>
> just to clarify as my previous message was missing this "small" detail):
>
>  I defined the initial admin as:
>
> CN=BOFH, DC=evil, DC=com
>
> Logged in as
>
> BOFH / password
>
> Password gets recognised but NiFi tells me I am not authorised to access
> the Flow.
>
> Rewrite the config so that initial admin as:
>
> cn=BOFH, dc=evil, dc=com
>
> Logged in as
>
> BOFH / password
>
> All works
>
> On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 12:38 AM, Andre <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> All,
>>
>> I accidentally bumped into this situation and I was wondering if anyone
>> else seen this as well.
>>
>> When provisioning a LDAP authenticated NiFi instance I defined the
>> initial admin as:
>>
>> CN=BOFH, DC=evil, DC=com
>>
>> To my surprise this did not work. Upon inspection of the authentication
>> and authorization files, I realised that internally NiFi seems to lower
>> case distinguished names "fields" like cn, ou, dc, etc.
>>
>> It happens to be that AD LDS seems to return upper case on all "fields"
>> of the LDAP DN.
>>
>> https://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/sharepoint/en-
>> US/d825ec95-94ad-4b0b-93cd-01214c312ef1/returning-lower-
>> case-distinguished-names-from-an-ad-lds-instance?forum=winserverDS
>>
>> Has anyone else noticed that when integrating NiFi into AD? If so, should
>> we raise it as a bug or simply address it via documentation?
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>
>

Reply via email to