From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (gate001.proxmox.com [45.144.208.40]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C65191FF09F for ; Thu, 03 Sep 2026 01:20:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gate001.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 7DBE12157F; Thu, 03 Sep 2026 01:20:07 +0200 (CEST) From: Thomas Lamprecht To: pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com, Robert Obkircher Subject: applied: [PATCH v1 proxmox-backup] config: invalidate CachedUserInfo after ACL changes Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2026 01:19:56 +0200 Message-ID: <178839119420.1132707.7653212302813244648.b4-ty@b4> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.47.3 In-Reply-To: <20260818133556.298498-1-r.obkircher@proxmox.com> References: <20260818133556.298498-1-r.obkircher@proxmox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1788391198225 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.917 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment (newer systems) RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED -2.3 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, medium trust SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Message-ID-Hash: WG5VRQBBPF4JJGR4QUONGYZMU2H3LTDJ X-Message-ID-Hash: WG5VRQBBPF4JJGR4QUONGYZMU2H3LTDJ X-MailFrom: t.lamprecht@proxmox.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; loop; banned-address; emergency; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.10 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Tue, 18 Aug 2026 15:34:01 +0200, Robert Obkircher wrote: > The ACL tree was cached for up to 5 seconds in CachedUserInfo, even > when the configuration was modified. This forced automated scripts to > wait for an arbitrary amount of time, and it was an unnecessary > security risk to keep revoked permissions for this long. > > Add a generation counter for acl.cfg and bump it upon save to force > subsequent requests to reload the file. A separate counter was chosen > for clarity, though incrementing the user_cache_generation would have > worked as well. > > [...] Applied, thanks! [1/1] config: invalidate CachedUserInfo after ACL changes commit: 0b24f4da31fd9db163cfe5d0f27749620bf176bd