>
> > It'd be awesome if FDB had the option to be/do something like a SQLite
> > library or work over a spawned PIPE or something to lock it down so only
> > the Couch server instance that launched it could use it...
>
> TLS and TCP are non-negligable overheads, but this may not matter much in
> practise. This is what I was thinking of with UNIX domain sockets. So I
> asked:
>
>
> https://forums.foundationdb.org/t/feature-request-support-unix-domain-sockets-for-client-local-server-access/1071
>
>
UDS works for those platforms that have it, and my Windows and mobile
devices don't. ;-)

There's the SASL library from way back that was designed to help servers
with exactly this problem...


Here's a thought, in FDB's xFF data set, add a "secured prefix" section
where the value is a symmetric key.
This wouldn't password protect based on the idea of "users" but by "key
prefix" instead.

When trying to access a particular subtree you must prove you know the
secret (I think it would be kind of silly to just pass the secret in
cleartext as part of the request, but there are many fast hash algorithms
to prove you know it).

I guess from there it's not too hard to allow multiple named passwords to
unlock access; and that's equivalent to a username/password system...

Changing the secret requires access to xFF section which should also be
password protected and subkeys of xFF could be protected with different
passwords (allowing different apps to change their own subtree of passwords
without access to change higher levels).

For the "cluster level" access, the protected key would be the "Couch
Instance Namespace" key, and each machine could be given its own
id/password.

Over time that model might even grow to support key based ACLs.

===============
Seeing how this could work, in this seemingly straight forward and
relatively basic/simple model, satisfies in my mind's eye that this
protection feature can/should arrive at some point in the not too distant
future.  Likely by the time CouchDB is looking at making a formal FDB based
release.


Thoughts?

Thanks!
Mike

Reply via email to