Allow custom authorization with an authorization engine #38358
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
In order to support the concept of different authorization engines, this change begins the refactoring of the AuthorizationService to support this. Previously, the asynchronous work for authorization was performed by the AsyncAuthorizer class, but this tied the authorization service to a role based implementation. In this change, the authorize method become asynchronous and delegates much of the actual permission checking to an AuthorizationEngine. The pre-existing RBAC permission checking has been abstracted into the RBACEngine. The majority of calls to AuthorizationEngine instances are asynchronous as the underlying implementation may need to make network calls that should not block the current thread, which are often network threads. This change is meant to be built upon. The basic concepts are introduced without proper documentation, plumbing to enable other AuthorizationEngine types, and some items we may want to refactor. For example, the AuthorizedIndices class is lazily loaded but this might actually be something we want to make asynchronous. We pass a lot of the same arguments to the various methods and it would be prudent to wrap these in a class; this class would provide a way for us to pass additional items needed by future enhancements without breaking the interface and requiring updates to all implementations. See #32435
This change replaces the AuthorizedIndices class with a simple list. The change to a simple list does remove the lazy loading of the authorized indices in favor of simpler code as the loading of this list is now an asynchronous operation that is delegated to the authorization engine.
This change introduces a new class called RequestInfo that encapsulates the common objects that are passed to the authorization engine methods. By doing so, we give ourselves a way of adding additional data without breaking the interface. Additionally, this also reduces the need to ensure we pass these three parameters in the same order everywhere for consistency.
This commit adds javadocs to the AuthorizationEngine interface aimed at developers of an authorization engine. Additionally, some classes were also moved to the core project so that they are ready to be exposed once we allow authorization engines to be plugged in.
Authorization engines can now be registered by implementing a plugin, which also has a service implementation of a security extension. Only one extension may register an authorization engine and this engine will be used for all users except reserved realm users and internal users.
This change moves the RequestInterceptor iteration from the action filter to the AuthorizationService. This is done to remove the need for the use of a role within the request interceptors and replace it with the AuthorizationEngine. The AuthorizationEngine interface was also enhanced with a new method that is used to determine if a users permission on one index is a subset of their permissions on a list of indices or aliases. Additionally, this change addresses some leftover cleanups.
This commit moves the evaluation of privileges from a few transport actions into the authorization engine. The APIs are used by other applications for making decisions and if a different authorization engine is used that is not role based, we should still allow these APIs to work. By moving this evaluation out of the transport action, the transport actions no longer have a dependency on roles.
jaymode
added
>feature
v7.0.0
:Security/Authorization
|
Pinging @elastic/es-security |
tvernum
approved these changes
Feb 5, 2019
...-authorization-engine/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/example/CustomAuthorizationEngine.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
tvernum
reviewed
Feb 5, 2019
| if (value != null) { | ||
| if (stringBuilder.length() > 1) { | ||
| stringBuilder.append(","); | ||
| } | ||
| stringBuilder.append("\""); | ||
| jsonStringEncoder.quoteAsString(value, stringBuilder); | ||
| jsonStringEncoder.quoteAsString(value.toString(), stringBuilder); |
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
Sorry, something went wrong.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
Sorry, something went wrong.
…rg/elasticsearch/example/CustomAuthorizationEngine.java Co-Authored-By: jaymode <jaymode@users.noreply.github.com>
jasontedor
added a commit
to jasontedor/elasticsearch
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 11, 2019
* master: Add an authentication cache for API keys (elastic#38469) Fix exit code in certutil packaging test (elastic#38393) Enable logs for intermittent test failure (elastic#38426) Disable BWC to backport recovering retention leases (elastic#38477) Enable bwc tests now that elastic#38443 is backported. (elastic#38462) Fix Master Failover and DataNode Leave Blocking Snapshot (elastic#38460) Recover retention leases during peer recovery (elastic#38435) Set update mappings mater node timeout to 30 min (elastic#38439) Assert job is not null in FullClusterRestartIT (elastic#38218) Update ilm-api.asciidoc, point to REMOVE policy (elastic#38235) (elastic#38463) SQL: Fix esType for DATETIME/DATE and INTERVALS (elastic#38179) Handle deprecation header-AbstractUpgradeTestCase (elastic#38396) XPack: core/ccr/Security-cli migration to java-time (elastic#38415) Disable bwc tests for elastic#38443 (elastic#38456) Bubble-up exceptions from scheduler (elastic#38317) Re-enable TasksClientDocumentationIT.testCancelTasks (elastic#38234) Allow custom authorization with an authorization engine (elastic#38358) CRUDDocumentationIT fix documentation references Remove support for internal versioning for concurrency control (elastic#38254)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
For some users, the built in authorization mechanism does not fit their
needs and no feature that we offer would allow them to control the
authorization process to meet their needs. In order to support this,
a concept of an AuthorizationEngine is being introduced, which can be
provided using the security extension mechanism.
An AuthorizationEngine is responsible for making the authorization
decisions about a request. The engine is responsible for knowing how to
authorize and can be backed by whatever mechanism a user wants. The
default mechanism is one backed by roles to provide the authorization
decisions. The AuthorizationEngine will be called by the
AuthorizationService, which handles more of the internal workings that
apply in general to authorization within Elasticsearch.
In order to support external authorization services that would back an
authorization engine, the entire authorization process has become
asynchronous, which also includes all calls to the AuthorizationEngine.
The use of roles also leaked out of the AuthorizationService in our
existing code that is not specifically related to roles so this also
needed to be addressed. RequestInterceptor instances sometimes used a
role to ensure a user was not attempting to escalate their privileges.
Addressing this leakage of roles meant that the RequestInterceptor
execution needed to move within the AuthorizationService and that
AuthorizationEngines needed to support detection of whether a user has
more privileges on a name than another. The second area where roles
leaked to the user is in the handling of a few privilege APIs that
could be used to retrieve the user's privileges or ask if a user has
privileges to perform an action. To remove the leakage of roles from
these actions, the AuthorizationService and AuthorizationEngine gained
methods that enabled an AuthorizationEngine to return the response for
these APIs.
Ultimately this feature is the work included in:
#37785
#37495
#37328
#36245
#38137
#38219
Closes #32435