Category Archives: Openstack

Creating a Self Trust In Keystone

Posted on by
Reply

Lets say you are an administrator of an OpenStack cloud. This means you are pretty much all powerful in the deployment. Now, you need to perform some operation, but you don’t want to give it full admin privileges? Why? well, do you work as root on your Linux box? I hope note. Here’s how to set up a self trust for a reduced set of roles on your token.
Continue reading →

Testing if a patch has test coverage

Posted on by
2

When a user requests a code review, the review is responsible for making sure that the code is tested.  While the quality of the tests is a subjective matter, their presences is not;  either they are there or they are not there.  If they are not there, it is on the developer to explain why or why not.

Not every line of code is testable.  Not every test is intelligent.  But, at a minimum, a test should ensure that the code in a patch is run at least once, without an unexpected exception.

Continue reading →

Converting policy.yaml to a list of dictionaries

Posted on by
Reply

The policy .yaml file generated from oslo has the following format:

# Intended scope(s): system
#"identity:update_endpoint_group": "rule:admin_required"
 
# Delete endpoint group.
# DELETE /v3/OS-EP-FILTER/endpoint_groups/{endpoint_group_id}
# Intended scope(s): system
#"identity:delete_endpoint_group": "rule:admin_required"

This is not very useful for anything other than feeding to oslo-policy to enforce. If you want to use these values for anything else, it would be much more useful to have each rule as a dictionary, and all of the rules in a list. Here is a little bit of awk to help out:

#!/usr/bin/awk -f
BEGIN {apilines=0; print("---")}
/#"/ {
    if (api == 1){
	printf("  ")
    }else{
	printf("- ")
    }
  split ($0,array,"\"")
  print ("rule:", array[2]);
  print ("  check:", array[4]);
  rule=0
}    
/# / {api=1;}
/^$/ {api=0; apilines=0;}
api == 1 && apilines == 0 {print ("- description:" substr($0,2))}
/# GET/  || /# DELETE/ || /# PUT/ || /# POST/ || /# HEAD/ || /# PATCH/ {
     print ("  " $2 ": " $3)
}
api == 1 { apilines = apilines +1 }

I have it saved in mungepolicy.awk. I ran it like this:

cat etc/keystone.policy.yaml.sample | ./mungepolicy.awk > /tmp/keystone.access.yaml

And the output looks like this:

---
- rule: admin_required
  check: role:admin or is_admin:1
- rule: service_role
  check: role:service
- rule: service_or_admin
  check: rule:admin_required or rule:service_role
- rule: owner
  check: user_id:%(user_id)s
- rule: admin_or_owner
  check: rule:admin_required or rule:owner
- rule: token_subject
  check: user_id:%(target.token.user_id)s
- rule: admin_or_token_subject
  check: rule:admin_required or rule:token_subject
- rule: service_admin_or_token_subject
  check: rule:service_or_admin or rule:token_subject
- description: Show application credential details.
  GET: /v3/users/{user_id}/application_credentials/{application_credential_id}
  HEAD: /v3/users/{user_id}/application_credentials/{application_credential_id}
  rule: identity:get_application_credential
  check: rule:admin_or_owner
- description: List application credentials for a user.
  GET: /v3/users/{user_id}/application_credentials
  HEAD: /v3/users/{user_id}/application_credentials
  rule: identity:list_application_credentials
  check: rule:admin_or_owner

Which is valid yaml. It might be a pain to deal with the verbs in separate keys. Ideally, that would be a list, too, but this will work for starters.

Requirements for an OpenStack Access Control Policy Management Tool

Posted on by
Reply

“We need a read only role.”

It seems like such a simple requirement.  Users have been requesting a read-only role for several years now.  Why is it so tough to implement?   Because it calls for  modifying access control policy across multiple, disjoint services deployed at innumerable distinct locations.

“We need help in modifying policy to implement our own read only role.”

This one is a little bit more attainable.  We should be able to provide better tools to help people customize their policy.  What should that look like?

We gathered some information at the last summit, and I am going to try and distill it to a requirements document here.

Continue reading →