----- Original Message -----
From: "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com> To: "Eli Mesika" <emesika@redhat.com> Cc: "engine-devel" <engine-devel@ovirt.org>, "Christopher Morrissey" <Christopher.Morrissey@netapp.com> Sent: Friday, November 23, 2012 8:38:34 AM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Design review summary for 3.2 - adding support for External Events
On 11/23/2012 01:10 AM, Eli Mesika wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com> To: "Christopher Morrissey" <Christopher.Morrissey@netapp.com> Cc: "Eli Mesika" <emesika@redhat.com>, "engine-devel" <engine-devel@ovirt.org> Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2012 8:35:56 AM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Design review summary for 3.2 - adding support for External Events
On 11/20/2012 04:07 PM, Morrissey, Christopher wrote: ...
> Hi Eli, > > I've perused the design and it looks very good for the purpose > of > adding events to the log as back end tasks on the NetApp VSC > are > started and complete. > > I do have one question. As part of the new UI plugin framework > that > Vojtech is working on he added the capability to retrieve a > session > ID that will be used outside of the oVirt engine to invoke > REST > API > calls. I'm assuming this session would have the same role as > the > user that is currently logged in. > > According to the event log design, only the Super user will > have > permissions to add events by default. This would mean that if > anyone > other than the super user is logged in and performing any > tasks > through the NetApp plugin, the server side of the VSC will > likely > not be able to log events. This could be confusing for users > as > sometimes they see events showing up giving them information > on > the > task progress and sometimes they don't depending on the role > logged > in. > > Would it make sense to allow all roles to log events by > default? > I'm > not sure what security problems would arise given that it is > just a > log and they would be tagged as external events.
Hi Christopher, our security model implies a black-list,
oops, I meant white-list of course ....
That's what I figured. :)
so, I don;t
think this is possible But still, a super-user can of course give the permission to add new events to all Roles in the system and you will have the same result. Does that make sense ?
That does make sense. We'll likely just try to use the API to log events when starting a task and if we receive an error we can bubble that up to the user letting them know that they need to either get the right permission or accept that they won't get messages in the oVirt log while the task completes.
Eli - not that the design includes checking for permissions on objects, why wouldn't we add this permission (ActionGroup) to other admin roles as well?
You mean in DB upgrade , right ?
well, in design, but then yes, as part of upgrade to fix the relevant pre-defined roles
Added to the install/upgrade section of feature detailed design http://wiki.ovirt.org/wiki/Features/Design/DetailedExternalEvents#Installati...
this is only for admin roles, not user roles. what's the risk in allowing admins to inject external events?
IIUC , you are right , no risk