Skip to content

Differentiate authorization between source/sink/function operations - #7466

Merged
srkukarni merged 2 commits into
apache:masterfrom
srkukarni:sourcesinkops
Jul 7, 2020
Merged

Differentiate authorization between source/sink/function operations#7466
srkukarni merged 2 commits into
apache:masterfrom
srkukarni:sourcesinkops

Conversation

@srkukarni

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

(If this PR fixes a github issue, please add Fixes #<xyz>.)

Fixes #

(or if this PR is one task of a github issue, please add Master Issue: #<xyz> to link to the master issue.)

Master Issue: #

Motivation

When doing any source/sink/function operation, we currently don't distinguish between sources, sinks and functions. However sources, sinks and functions are different operations, with different endpoints and often require different auth handling. This pr introduces a couple of new interfaces for checking auth for sources and sink operations.

Modifications

Describe the modifications you've done.

Verifying this change

  • Make sure that the change passes the CI checks.

(Please pick either of the following options)

This change is a trivial rework / code cleanup without any test coverage.

(or)

This change is already covered by existing tests, such as (please describe tests).

(or)

This change added tests and can be verified as follows:

(example:)

  • Added integration tests for end-to-end deployment with large payloads (10MB)
  • Extended integration test for recovery after broker failure

Does this pull request potentially affect one of the following parts:

If yes was chosen, please highlight the changes

  • Dependencies (does it add or upgrade a dependency): (yes / no)
  • The public API: (yes / no)
  • The schema: (yes / no / don't know)
  • The default values of configurations: (yes / no)
  • The wire protocol: (yes / no)
  • The rest endpoints: (yes / no)
  • The admin cli options: (yes / no)
  • Anything that affects deployment: (yes / no / don't know)

Documentation

  • Does this pull request introduce a new feature? (yes / no)
  • If yes, how is the feature documented? (not applicable / docs / JavaDocs / not documented)
  • If a feature is not applicable for documentation, explain why?
  • If a feature is not documented yet in this PR, please create a followup issue for adding the documentation

@srkukarni srkukarni added this to the 2.7.0 milestone Jul 7, 2020
@srkukarni
srkukarni requested a review from jerrypeng July 7, 2020 06:33
@srkukarni srkukarni self-assigned this Jul 7, 2020
@jerrypeng

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@srkukarni my concern with this PR is BC. Currently, if a user has "functions" permission, the user can run sources, sinks, and functions. With this change, a user has to now have the specific entitlement of sources/sinks to run them as well.

@srkukarni

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@jerrypeng That is indeed a concern. Any ideas on how to solve it?

@srkukarni

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Coming to think more about it, the existing sources/sinks will continue to run fine. Thus upon upgrade of cluster, things still will work ok, except that newer sources/sinks will need additional permissions. Couldn't that just be notes in upgrade process?

@jerrypeng

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@srkukarni can you add a note to the release notes about this?

@srkukarni

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Added

@srkukarni
srkukarni merged commit 77dccd2 into apache:master Jul 7, 2020
@srkukarni
srkukarni deleted the sourcesinkops branch July 7, 2020 22:44
@wolfstudy

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

cherry-pick the pull request to branch-2.6(2.6.1)

huangdx0726 pushed a commit to huangdx0726/pulsar that referenced this pull request Aug 24, 2020
…pache#7466)

* Differentiate between source/sink/function operations

* Added release notes

Co-authored-by: Sanjeev Kulkarni <sanjeevk@splunk.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants