From: "Shannon Sterz" <s.sterz@proxmox.com>
To: "Samuel Rufinatscha" <s.rufinatscha@proxmox.com>
Cc: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion
<pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
Subject: Re: [pbs-devel] [PATCH proxmox-backup 1/3] pbs-config: cache verified API token secrets
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2025 15:04:34 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <DEQC8V17QVC8.MDWJDTV3DB71@proxmox.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251205132559.197434-2-s.rufinatscha@proxmox.com>
On Fri Dec 5, 2025 at 2:25 PM CET, Samuel Rufinatscha wrote:
> Currently, every token-based API request reads the token.shadow file and
> runs the expensive password hash verification for the given token
> secret. This shows up as a hotspot in /status profiling (see
> bug #6049 [1]).
>
> This patch introduces an in-memory cache of successfully verified token
> secrets. Subsequent requests for the same token+secret combination only
> perform a comparison using openssl::memcmp::eq and avoid re-running the
> password hash. The cache is updated when a token secret is set and
> cleared when a token is deleted. Note, this does NOT include manual
> config changes, which will be covered in a subsequent patch.
>
> This patch partly fixes bug #6049 [1].
>
> [1] https://bugzilla.proxmox.com/show_bug.cgi?id=7017
>
> Signed-off-by: Samuel Rufinatscha <s.rufinatscha@proxmox.com>
> ---
> pbs-config/src/token_shadow.rs | 58 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 57 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/pbs-config/src/token_shadow.rs b/pbs-config/src/token_shadow.rs
> index 640fabbf..47aa2fc2 100644
> --- a/pbs-config/src/token_shadow.rs
> +++ b/pbs-config/src/token_shadow.rs
> @@ -1,6 +1,8 @@
> use std::collections::HashMap;
> +use std::sync::RwLock;
>
> use anyhow::{bail, format_err, Error};
> +use once_cell::sync::OnceCell;
> use serde::{Deserialize, Serialize};
> use serde_json::{from_value, Value};
>
> @@ -13,6 +15,13 @@ use crate::{open_backup_lockfile, BackupLockGuard};
> const LOCK_FILE: &str = pbs_buildcfg::configdir!("/token.shadow.lock");
> const CONF_FILE: &str = pbs_buildcfg::configdir!("/token.shadow");
>
> +/// Global in-memory cache for successfully verified API token secrets.
> +/// The cache stores plain text secrets for token Authids that have already been
> +/// verified against the hashed values in `token.shadow`. This allows for cheap
> +/// subsequent authentications for the same token+secret combination, avoiding
> +/// recomputing the password hash on every request.
> +static TOKEN_SECRET_CACHE: OnceCell<RwLock<ApiTokenSecretCache>> = OnceCell::new();
any reason you are using a once cell with a cutom get_or_init function
instead of a simple `LazyCell` [1] here? seems to me that this would be
the more appropriate type here? similar question for the
proxmox-access-control portion of this series.
[1]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/cell/struct.LazyCell.html
> +
> #[derive(Serialize, Deserialize)]
> #[serde(rename_all = "kebab-case")]
> /// ApiToken id / secret pair
> @@ -54,9 +63,25 @@ pub fn verify_secret(tokenid: &Authid, secret: &str) -> Result<(), Error> {
> bail!("not an API token ID");
> }
>
> + // Fast path
> + if let Some(cached) = token_secret_cache().read().unwrap().secrets.get(tokenid) {
> + // Compare cached secret with provided one using constant time comparison
> + if openssl::memcmp::eq(cached.as_bytes(), secret.as_bytes()) {
> + // Already verified before
> + return Ok(());
> + }
> + // Fall through to slow path if secret doesn't match cached one
> + }
> +
> + // Slow path: read file + verify hash
> let data = read_file()?;
> match data.get(tokenid) {
> - Some(hashed_secret) => proxmox_sys::crypt::verify_crypt_pw(secret, hashed_secret),
> + Some(hashed_secret) => {
> + proxmox_sys::crypt::verify_crypt_pw(secret, hashed_secret)?;
> + // Cache the plain secret for future requests
> + cache_insert_secret(tokenid.clone(), secret.to_owned());
> + Ok(())
> + }
> None => bail!("invalid API token"),
> }
> }
> @@ -82,6 +107,8 @@ fn set_secret(tokenid: &Authid, secret: &str) -> Result<(), Error> {
> data.insert(tokenid.clone(), hashed_secret);
> write_file(data)?;
>
> + cache_insert_secret(tokenid.clone(), secret.to_owned());
> +
> Ok(())
> }
>
> @@ -97,5 +124,34 @@ pub fn delete_secret(tokenid: &Authid) -> Result<(), Error> {
> data.remove(tokenid);
> write_file(data)?;
>
> + cache_remove_secret(tokenid);
> +
> Ok(())
> }
> +
> +struct ApiTokenSecretCache {
> + /// Keys are token Authids, values are the corresponding plain text secrets.
> + /// Entries are added after a successful on-disk verification in
> + /// `verify_secret` or when a new token secret is generated by
> + /// `generate_and_set_secret`. Used to avoid repeated
> + /// password-hash computation on subsequent authentications.
> + secrets: HashMap<Authid, String>,
> +}
> +
> +fn token_secret_cache() -> &'static RwLock<ApiTokenSecretCache> {
> + TOKEN_SECRET_CACHE.get_or_init(|| {
> + RwLock::new(ApiTokenSecretCache {
> + secrets: HashMap::new(),
> + })
> + })
> +}
> +
> +fn cache_insert_secret(tokenid: Authid, secret: String) {
> + let mut cache = token_secret_cache().write().unwrap();
unwrap here could panic if another thread is holding a guard, any reason
to not return a result here and bubble up the error instead?
> + cache.secrets.insert(tokenid, secret);
> +}
> +
> +fn cache_remove_secret(tokenid: &Authid) {
> + let mut cache = token_secret_cache().write().unwrap();
same here and in the following patches (i won't comment on each
occurrence there separately.)
> + cache.secrets.remove(tokenid);
> +}
_______________________________________________
pbs-devel mailing list
pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com
https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pbs-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-12-05 14:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-12-05 13:25 [pbs-devel] [PATCH proxmox{-backup, } 0/6] Reduce token.shadow verification overhead Samuel Rufinatscha
2025-12-05 13:25 ` [pbs-devel] [PATCH proxmox-backup 1/3] pbs-config: cache verified API token secrets Samuel Rufinatscha
2025-12-05 14:04 ` Shannon Sterz [this message]
2025-12-05 13:25 ` [pbs-devel] [PATCH proxmox-backup 2/3] pbs-config: invalidate token-secret cache on token.shadow changes Samuel Rufinatscha
2025-12-05 13:25 ` [pbs-devel] [PATCH proxmox-backup 3/3] pbs-config: add TTL window to token secret cache Samuel Rufinatscha
2025-12-05 13:25 ` [pbs-devel] [PATCH proxmox 1/3] proxmox-access-control: cache verified API token secrets Samuel Rufinatscha
2025-12-05 13:25 ` [pbs-devel] [PATCH proxmox 2/3] proxmox-access-control: invalidate token-secret cache on token.shadow changes Samuel Rufinatscha
2025-12-05 13:25 ` [pbs-devel] [PATCH proxmox 3/3] proxmox-access-control: add TTL window to token secret cache Samuel Rufinatscha
2025-12-05 14:06 ` [pbs-devel] [PATCH proxmox{-backup, } 0/6] Reduce token.shadow verification overhead Shannon Sterz
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=DEQC8V17QVC8.MDWJDTV3DB71@proxmox.com \
--to=s.sterz@proxmox.com \
--cc=pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com \
--cc=s.rufinatscha@proxmox.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.