From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 914E6C5FD for ; Mon, 11 Apr 2022 12:20:26 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 854F2309B for ; Mon, 11 Apr 2022 12:20:26 +0200 (CEST) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com [94.136.29.106]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id 8CDF53090 for ; Mon, 11 Apr 2022 12:20:25 +0200 (CEST) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 5EAB740854 for ; Mon, 11 Apr 2022 12:20:25 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <23048c05-c2bc-19f1-e110-fc8772bc79a7@proxmox.com> Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2022 12:20:24 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.7.0 Content-Language: en-US To: Thomas Lamprecht , Proxmox Backup Server development discussion References: <20220323130111.2552347-1-m.heiserer@proxmox.com> <20220323130111.2552347-2-m.heiserer@proxmox.com> <2ec9c9fd-ee83-754b-1206-56577f487dca@proxmox.com> From: Matthias Heiserer In-Reply-To: <2ec9c9fd-ee83-754b-1206-56577f487dca@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 1.456 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment NICE_REPLY_A -3.086 Looks like a legit reply (A) SCC_BODY_URI_ONLY 0.001 - SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE -0.01 - Subject: Re: [pbs-devel] [PATCH proxmox-backup 2/3] fix #3939: set default value in domains endpoint X-BeenThere: pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2022 10:20:26 -0000 On 11.04.2022 10:12, Thomas Lamprecht wrote: > On 23.03.22 14:01, Matthias Heiserer wrote: >> Because the default realm is stored in node.cfg, here we have to add >> it to the returned information. >> >> Signed-off-by: Matthias Heiserer >> --- >> src/api2/access/domain.rs | 11 +++++++++-- >> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> > >> @@ -24,17 +24,19 @@ use pbs_api_types::BasicRealmInfo; >> /// Authentication domain/realm index. >> fn list_domains(mut rpcenv: &mut dyn RpcEnvironment) -> Result, Error> { >> let mut list = Vec::new(); >> + let default_realm = node::config()?.0.default_realm; > > feels not ideal to pull in the node config here, if we really need to add a config > (see my bugzilla reply asking if the requester would be OK with just making the > realm box stateful), then I'd actually add it in the domain config as priority > flag (allow 0 to 100, default 50) which is then used for sorting the realms and > also for auto-selecting the highest priority + name sorted realm. If I'm not mistaken the realm selector on the login screen is already stateful. Sorting sounds interesting, but how would we go about the default pam/pbs auth? They are not in the domains config, so i guess we have to add them there. > > Same level of complexity in terms of what we need to safe (one new struct member), > but avoids the need to always load+parse an extra config and also more features we > can use it for. > > Please note also that we'd like to have feature parity for the stuff that exists > in PVE or PMG too. Not sure I understand the point on feature parity. You mean that the default realm should be set in the realms view?