<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=GB2312" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><font face="Helvetica, Arial,
sans-serif">For kimchi admin, they should be responsible for
console administration and physical resources management to
guarantee sufficient supply of virtualization environment.<br>
For resource admin, they should be responsible for balance needs
to create virtual resources for end user tasks. I do not think
they should be bothered with supply and healthy of physical
resources.<br>
For resource user, they need to be allocated resources to handle
their task, at this level, fine granularity is key, permission
is more straight-forward, if role is only a group of
permissions, I think it is useless at this level.<br>
<br>
for the 2nd and 3rd, they are kimchi users, physical resources
should be transparent to them.<br>
</font><br>
On 1/20/2014 10:25 PM, Shu Ming wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:52DD31CB.7090107@linux.vnet.ibm.com"
type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=GB2312"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Yu Xin,<br>
<br>
Thanks for your detail comments.<br>
<br>
ÓÚ 2014/1/20 18:20, Yu Xin Huo дµÀ:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:52DCF87B.4010804@linux.vnet.ibm.com"
type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=GB2312"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
I have read the oVirt security model, I think basically, for
virtualization management, it can be applied to Kimchi.<br>
I think Kimchi's security model can be created with some
customization of oVirt's security model.<br>
<br>
I recommend 3 levels of administration below:<br>
<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://access.redhat.com/site/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Virtualization/3.0/html/Administration_Guide/Administration_Guide-Managing_User_Access.html">https://access.redhat.com/site/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Virtualization/3.0/html/Administration_Guide/Administration_Guide-Managing_User_Access.html</a><br>
1. console admin -- handle kimchi administration, host level
physical resources management.<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
That is like the system administrator in my proposal who are also
responsible to assign roles to users..<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:52DCF87B.4010804@linux.vnet.ibm.com"
type="cite">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"> 2. resource admin -- OOTB roles
with permission combined with resource type, like VMAdmin,
StorageAdmin, NetworkAdmin...<br>
this type of users are responsible to construct
environment for a certain task.<br>
their authorizations can be easily constructed with
combination with OOTB roles, then they can start to create
resources needed.<br>
I think it will be needed if we can set some limit on
resource usages like max cpu, memory, bandwidth.\<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
I agree that the user with this role can access the resources
based on resource type instead of on resource object. For
example, if the uer get a "Storage Admin" role, he can access all
the storage pools in Kimchi not bound to one specific storage
pool.<br>
<br>
In the pother hand, in the initial effort, I don't want to define
so many roles to manage resources. In my proposal, I use one role
"infrastructure" to be a role accessing both the host level
physical resource and virtualization resources. Host level
physical resources management means disks, physical networks in
the hosts. Virtualization resources means storage pools, network
pools. We can keep this in mind and try to define more
administration roles to replace the "infrastructure role" in the
next step. <br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:52DCF87B.4010804@linux.vnet.ibm.com"
type="cite">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"> <br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://access.redhat.com/site/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Virtualization/3.0/html/Administration_Guide/Virtual_Roles.html">https://access.redhat.com/site/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Virtualization/3.0/html/Administration_Guide/Virtual_Roles.html</a><br>
3. resource user -- at this level, I tend to think that no
OOTB roles are needed as fine granularity of authorization
will be needed.<br>
the authorization at this level are at a resource
basis, need to assign permissions for each user on each
resource.<br>
one thing to emphasize is that, resource user does not
mean the user can only use(start/stop/vnc) the resource, <br>
it depends on concrete case, they can be assigned with
permission to update/delete resources.<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
As you can see in Ovirt, authorization is applied based on the
combination of the three components in any action
<div xmlns:d="http://docbook.org/ns/docbook" class="itemizedlist">
<ul>
<li class="listitem">
<div class="para"> The user performing the action </div>
</li>
<li class="listitem">
<div class="para"> The type of action being performed </div>
</li>
<li class="listitem">
<div class="para"> The object on which the action is being
performed </div>
</li>
</ul>
</div>
Please be noted that the object is not bound to a role in oVirt.
On the other hand, you need assign a resource to a user. Here is
one example to assign a virtual machine to a user With a
"UserRole" role.
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://access.redhat.com/site/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Virtualization/3.0/html/Administration_Guide/Virtual_Roles.html">https://access.redhat.com/site/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Virtualization/3.0/html/Administration_Guide/Virtual_Roles.html</a><br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:52DCF87B.4010804@linux.vnet.ibm.com"
type="cite">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"> <br>
I think this is a flexible and efficient authority delegation
model with responsibilities balanced.<br>
<br>
<br>
On 1/15/2014 3:03 PM, Shu Ming wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:52D632AF.7000209@linux.vnet.ibm.com"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
charset=GB2312">
<h1>Background</h1>
<br>
In Kimchi, now we have a basic authentication model based on
PAM. In this model, all the authenticated user get all of the
privileges to access the resources in Kimchi. However, it is
too simple to cause some security holes and classifying the
user with different roles is a way to address the holes. Roles
with very fine grained privileges need huge effort and time,
so here we are trying to split the effort with several steps.
And we will discuss the first step of the effort in the below
which can be achieved in a certain time bound and reserve the
forward compatibility for future extensions.<br>
<br>
<br>
<h1>First step of the effort</h1>
<br>
In this step, the goal is to authorize the user's action on a
resource by roles. The user action here is applied by the REST
API exposed by Kimchi. Every action on Kimchi resources
should be checked based on the user's role. In this step, we
will not try to have roles in a very fine granularity.
Naturally, three permanent roles will be created by default,
the system administrator role, the infrastructure role and the
user role.<br>
<br>
* The system administrator get the privileges to manage the
roles for the other users including assigning a role to a
user, removing the role from a user &etc. A default user
"admink" will be created by default with a system
administrator role assigned to it. And the role of the user
"admink" can not be modified. <br>
<br>
* The infrastructure role get the privileges to manage the
physical resources and virtual resources including network's
creation and deletion, create or delete storage storage pools
or storage volumes' creation and deletion, adding a user to
the user list of storage storage pool &etc. <br>
<br>
* The user role get the privileges to apply action on VMs
including VMs' starting and stopping, viewing the VM console
by VNC &etc.<br>
<br>
* Some of the change can be enhanced on the existing REST
API like "DELETE /storagepools/poo1/vo1". But we need create
new REST APIs for actions like adding a role for a user like "
PUT /users/user1 {role: "user role"}"<br>
<br>
* Database is needed to store the user information
including roles and resource user list<br>
<br>
Beside the privileges inherited from the user's role, Kimchi
will check if a user get the permission to access a resource
based on a tuple. The tuple is composed from both the
privileges of the user and the user list of the resource. An
example is, if a user try ti delete a storage volume from the
stroage pool, Kimchi will check if it is assigned a
infrastructure role and if it is in the user list of the
storage pool.<br>
<br>
<h1>Next step of the effort</h1>
<br>
* The roles are defined in a very fine granularity containing
the privileges precisely matching what the system
administrator expects. <br>
<br>
* Existing roles can by customized by the system
administrator from a set of previleges. The set of
privileges should be pre-defined and hierarchy. <br>
<br>
* The system administrator can create new roles with
customized privileges <br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
Kimchi-devel mailing list
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Kimchi-devel@ovirt.org">Kimchi-devel@ovirt.org</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/kimchi-devel">http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/kimchi-devel</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
Kimchi-devel mailing list
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Kimchi-devel@ovirt.org">Kimchi-devel@ovirt.org</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/kimchi-devel">http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/kimchi-devel</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>