I think we're saying the same :) Let me rephrase it differently: to set the owner of a file, the user needs to be resolved at OS level. If the user does not exist (from the OS point of view), NiFi won't be able to set the owner (even though the username is in the LDAP configured for NiFi authentication). Does it make more sense?
$ touch test.file $ id toto id: toto: no such user $ chown toto test.file chown: toto: illegal user name Pierre 2018-05-30 14:13 GMT+02:00 James McMahon <[email protected]>: > I don't understand this: > "Until you *can't* resolve the user with OS commands, I don't think NiFi > will be able to set the expected owner on the file" > Did you intend to say can there - don't we want to be able to resolve the > user at the OS as an initial validation that we can get to the ldap and as > prerequisite of Nifi being able to set the owner? And in this case I can > indeed resolve at the OS level. That seems like a good thing to me. > > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 7:53 AM, Pierre Villard < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> It depends how your OS is configured, you could leverage tools like SSSD >> to resolve users against your LDAP but that's something to be configured at >> OS level. >> Until you can't resolve the user with OS commands, I don't think NiFi >> will be able to set the expected owner on the file. >> >> 2018-05-30 11:54 GMT+02:00 James McMahon <[email protected]>: >> >>> Hello Pierre, and thank you. The user in this case - nifi - is not in >>> the local /etc/passwd and is in the ldap. I presume this will force the id >>> <username> to resolve using the ldap, if it does resolve? At the OS the id >>> command returns the uid, the gid, and the groups to which user nifi has >>> membership within the ldap. >>> >>> On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 4:37 AM, Pierre Villard < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Jim, >>>> >>>> LDAP for authentication and authorizations in NiFi has nothing to do >>>> with the processors. >>>> How processors are running/working is completely independent to the >>>> authN/authZ model you configure for NiFi. >>>> >>>> Regarding your error, I'd say that you get this error because >>>> user/group you're setting in the processor configuration cannot be resolved >>>> at OS level (even though they exist in the LDAP, but again, that's totally >>>> unrelated). Something you can quickly check: can you resolve the >>>> username/group on the host where you're using PutFile processor? What do >>>> you get if you execute the following command: id <username>? >>>> >>>> Pierre >>>> >>>> 2018-05-30 1:14 GMT+02:00 Joe Witt <[email protected]>: >>>> >>>>> jim >>>>> >>>>> please only post to one list. >>>>> >>>>> users is good for this. >>>>> >>>>> thanks >>>>> joe >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, May 29, 2018, 3:54 PM James McMahon <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Good evening. I have recently migrated my nifi service host server >>>>>> from local resolution of users and groups to use an LDAP server. I >>>>>> configured login-identity-providers.xml and >>>>>> nifi.security.user.login.identity.provider. >>>>>> I verified my configuration is known to NiFi by first restarting my nifi >>>>>> service and then attempting a login to the URL by a user without a cert, >>>>>> forcing it to resolve using LDAP. This appeared to work. >>>>>> >>>>>> I then attempted to set my file owner and file group in a PutFile to >>>>>> a user and a group that are each in the LDAP. The PutFile throws a >>>>>> Warning >>>>>> for both owner and group: >>>>>> java.nio.file.attribute.UserPrincipalNotFoundException. >>>>>> The file is still output by the processor. It appears to default the user >>>>>> and owner to nifi. >>>>>> >>>>>> A cursory review of the PutFile source shows that PutFile employs >>>>>> getUserPrincipalLookupService() when it seemingly tries to validate >>>>>> the user and group. >>>>>> >>>>>> How can I get this to resolve through the LDAP for the PutFile? >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks for any insights. -Jim >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
