public inbox for pdm-devel@lists.proxmox.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Shannon Sterz" <s.sterz@proxmox.com>
To: "Dominik Csapak" <d.csapak@proxmox.com>,
	"Proxmox Datacenter Manager development discussion"
	<pdm-devel@lists.proxmox.com>,
	"Dietmar Maurer" <dietmar@proxmox.com>
Subject: Re: [pdm-devel] [PATCH proxmox 2/4] access-control: add acl api feature
Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2025 14:58:10 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <D924J9S27KUN.3T32GISEJ9JRV@proxmox.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3293442a-0aed-4ab6-a6ee-5a0f8ea6b1e6@proxmox.com>

On Wed Apr 9, 2025 at 1:39 PM CEST, Dominik Csapak wrote:
> On 4/9/25 13:01, Dietmar Maurer wrote:
>>
>>> +/// Get ACL entries, can be filter by path.
>>> +pub fn read_acl(
>>> +    path: Option<String>,
>>> +    exact: bool,
>>> +    rpcenv: &mut dyn RpcEnvironment,
>>> +) -> Result<Vec<AclListItem>, Error> {
>>> +    let auth_id = rpcenv
>>> +        .get_auth_id()
>>> +        .ok_or_else(|| format_err!("endpoint called without an auth id"))?
>>> +        .parse()?;
>>> +
>>> +    let top_level_privs = CachedUserInfo::new()?.lookup_privs(&auth_id, &["access", "acl"]);
>>> +
>>> +    let filter = if top_level_privs & access_conf().acl_audit_privileges() == 0 {
>>> +        Some(auth_id)
>>> +    } else {
>>> +        None
>>> +    };
>>
>> As discussed offline, maybe we can use CachedUserInfo::check_privs here?
>>
>>
>
> maybe something like this for the update case (untested, please verify before using this!):
> (the diff is for pbs, where the code was copied from)
>
> this also includes a reformatted check for the token,non-token, same user checks
> that are IMHO more readable than what we currently have
> with the match, i think it's much more obvious that all cases are handled
>
> ---
>       let user_info = CachedUserInfo::new()?;
>
> -    let top_level_privs = user_info.lookup_privs(&current_auth_id, &["access", "acl"]);
> -    if top_level_privs & PRIV_PERMISSIONS_MODIFY == 0 {
> +    let has_modify_permission = user_info
> +        .check_privs(
> +            &current_auth_id,
> +            &["access", "acl"],
> +            PRIV_PERMISSIONS_MODIFY,
> +            false,

the false here means that partial matches are discounted. i'm not sure
this is correct as at least in pbs and pdm, we do use a partial check as
that is equivalent to the check i ported over.

imo, we'd need to discuss what the proper semantics are here and at
least up until now, we decided for partial semantics.

> +        )
> +        .is_ok();
> +
> +    if !has_modify_permission {
>           if group.is_some() {
>               bail!("Unprivileged users are not allowed to create group ACL item.");
>           }
>
>           match &auth_id {
>               Some(auth_id) => {
> -                if current_auth_id.is_token() {
> -                    bail!("Unprivileged API tokens can't set ACL items.");
> -                } else if !auth_id.is_token() {
> -                    bail!("Unprivileged users can only set ACL items for API tokens.");
> -                } else if auth_id.user() != current_auth_id.user() {
> -                    bail!("Unprivileged users can only set ACL items for their own API tokens.");
> +                let same_user = auth_id.user() == current_auth_id.user();
> +                match (current_auth_id.is_token(), auth_id.is_token(), same_user) {
> +                    (true, _, _) => bail!("Unprivileged API tokens can't set ACL items."),
> +                    (false, false, _) => {
> +                        bail!("Unprivileged users can only set ACL items for API tokens.")
> +                    }
> +                    (false, true, true) => {
> +                        // users are always allowed to modify ACLs for their own tokens
> +                    }
> +                    (false, true, false) => {
> +                        bail!("Unprivileged users can only set ACL items for their own API tokens.")
> +                    }
>                   }
>               }
>               None => {
> ---



_______________________________________________
pdm-devel mailing list
pdm-devel@lists.proxmox.com
https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pdm-devel


  reply	other threads:[~2025-04-09 12:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-04-03 14:17 [pdm-devel] [PATCH datacenter-manager/proxmox/yew-comp 0/9] ACL edit api and ui components Shannon Sterz
2025-04-03 14:17 ` [pdm-devel] [PATCH proxmox 1/4] access-control: add more types to prepare for api feature Shannon Sterz
2025-04-03 14:17 ` [pdm-devel] [PATCH proxmox 2/4] access-control: add acl " Shannon Sterz
2025-04-09 11:01   ` Dietmar Maurer
2025-04-09 11:39     ` Dominik Csapak
2025-04-09 12:58       ` Shannon Sterz [this message]
2025-04-10  6:28         ` Dominik Csapak
2025-04-10  8:17           ` Shannon Sterz
2025-04-10 10:09             ` Dominik Csapak
2025-04-11 10:29         ` Shannon Sterz
2025-04-11 10:53           ` Dominik Csapak
2025-04-11 11:40             ` Shannon Sterz
2025-04-03 14:18 ` [pdm-devel] [PATCH proxmox 3/4] access-control: add comments to roles function of AccessControlConfig Shannon Sterz
2025-04-03 14:18 ` [pdm-devel] [PATCH proxmox 4/4] access-control: add generic roles endpoint to `api` feature Shannon Sterz
2025-04-03 14:18 ` [pdm-devel] [PATCH yew-comp 1/3] api-types/role_selector: depend on common `RoleInfo` type Shannon Sterz
2025-04-03 14:18 ` [pdm-devel] [PATCH yew-comp 2/3] acl: add a view and semi-generic `EditWindow` for acl entries Shannon Sterz
2025-04-03 14:18 ` [pdm-devel] [PATCH yew-comp 3/3] role_selector/acl_edit: make api endpoint and default role configurable Shannon Sterz
2025-04-03 14:18 ` [pdm-devel] [PATCH datacenter-manager 1/2] server: use proxmox-access-control api implementations Shannon Sterz
2025-04-03 14:18 ` [pdm-devel] [PATCH datacenter-manager 2/2] ui: configuration: add panel for viewing and editing acl entries Shannon Sterz
2025-04-11 13:45 ` [pdm-devel] [PATCH datacenter-manager/proxmox/yew-comp 0/9] ACL edit api and ui components 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=D924J9S27KUN.3T32GISEJ9JRV@proxmox.com \
    --to=s.sterz@proxmox.com \
    --cc=d.csapak@proxmox.com \
    --cc=dietmar@proxmox.com \
    --cc=pdm-devel@lists.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Service provided by Proxmox Server Solutions GmbH | Privacy | Legal