From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 327071FF179 for ; Wed, 15 Oct 2025 17:20:19 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 49F101F65E; Wed, 15 Oct 2025 17:20:38 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <52b7cfb5-83bf-4717-b93d-14f5e013aa99@proxmox.com> Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2025 17:20:35 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird To: Proxmox Datacenter Manager development discussion , Shan Shaji References: <20251014150358.553238-1-s.shaji@proxmox.com> <20251014150358.553238-3-s.shaji@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Stefan Hanreich In-Reply-To: <20251014150358.553238-3-s.shaji@proxmox.com> X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.713 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Subject: Re: [pdm-devel] [PATCH datacenter-manager 2/3] fix #6901: api: add explicit permission check for vnets list X-BeenThere: pdm-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox Datacenter Manager development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Proxmox Datacenter Manager development discussion Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: pdm-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com Sender: "pdm-devel" On 10/14/25 5:03 PM, Shan Shaji wrote: > When a non-root user tried to access the EVPN section, the API was > throwing "403: permission check failed" error. To fix this, add > explicit permission check for the `/vnets` endpoint. > > Now every authenticated user can access the endpoint however, the user > needs to have at least `Resource.Audit` permission under `/resource`. > Only the vnets from remotes which the user has `Resource.Audit` > privilege on `/remote/{remote_name}` will be included in the returned > list. > > Signed-off-by: Shan Shaji > --- > server/src/api/sdn/vnets.rs | 29 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- > 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/server/src/api/sdn/vnets.rs b/server/src/api/sdn/vnets.rs > index a8092cf..a2dfdb4 100644 > --- a/server/src/api/sdn/vnets.rs > +++ b/server/src/api/sdn/vnets.rs > @@ -1,3 +1,4 @@ > +use core::option::Option::Some; unneeded import? > use std::collections::HashSet; > > use anyhow::{format_err, Error}; > @@ -5,10 +6,11 @@ use pbs_api_types::REMOTE_ID_SCHEMA; > use pdm_api_types::{ > remotes::RemoteType, > sdn::{CreateVnetRemote, ListVnet, SDN_ID_SCHEMA, VXLAN_ID_SCHEMA}, > - Authid, > + Authid, PRIV_RESOURCE_AUDIT, > }; > +use proxmox_access_control::CachedUserInfo; > use proxmox_rest_server::WorkerTask; > -use proxmox_router::{Router, RpcEnvironment}; > +use proxmox_router::{http_bail, Permission, Router, RpcEnvironment}; > use proxmox_schema::api; > use pve_api_types::{CreateVnet, SdnVnetType}; > > @@ -52,16 +54,37 @@ pub const ROUTER: Router = Router::new() > type: ListVnet, > }, > }, > + access: { > + permission: &Permission::Anybody, > + description: "The user needs to have at least the `Resource.Audit` privilege under `/resource`. > + Only vnets from remotes for which the user has `Resource.Audit` on `/remote/{remote_name}` > + will be included in the returned list." > + } > )] > /// Query VNets of PVE remotes with optional filtering options > async fn list_vnets( > pending: Option, > running: Option, > remotes: Option>, > + rpcenv: &mut dyn RpcEnvironment, > ) -> Result, Error> { > + let user_info = CachedUserInfo::new()?; > + > + let auth_id: Authid = rpcenv > + .get_auth_id() > + .ok_or_else(|| format_err!("no authid available"))? > + .parse()?; > + > + if !user_info.any_privs_below(&auth_id, &["resource"], PRIV_RESOURCE_AUDIT)? { > + http_bail!(FORBIDDEN, "user has no access to resources"); we use UNAUTHORIZED instead of FORBIDDEN in other places, so imo would be better to do that here too - same for the other 2 patches as well. > + } > + > let (remote_config, _) = pdm_config::remotes::config()?; > + let authorized_remotes = remote_config.into_iter().filter(|(remote_name, _)| { > + user_info.lookup_privs(&auth_id, &["resource", &remote_name]) & PRIV_RESOURCE_AUDIT != 0 > + }); > > - let filtered_remotes = remote_config.into_iter().filter_map(|(_, remote)| { > + let filtered_remotes = authorized_remotes.filter_map(|(_, remote)| { > if remote.ty == RemoteType::Pve > && remotes > .as_ref() _______________________________________________ pdm-devel mailing list pdm-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pdm-devel