Hi, Rajin, Does providing the old-secret help? My understanding is that the encoded passwd is the result of a 1-way hash with the secret. So, one can't decode the passwd with old-secret. If that's the case, one still needs to provide the unencrypted paaswd to re-encode with the new secret?
Thanks, Jun On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 1:28 AM, Rajini Sivaram <rajinisiva...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Jun/Jason, > > I was wondering whether it is worth adding a new property (static config in > server.properties) to pass in the previous encoder password as well when > changing encoder password. So you would set: > > - password.encoder.secret=new-password > - password.encoder.old.secret=old-password > > When the broker starts up and loads passwords from ZK, it would check if > old-password is being used. If so, it would re-encode all passwords in ZK > using new-password and store them back in ZK. If the new-password is > already in use in ZK, the old one will be ignored. This needs an extra > property, but makes it simpler for the user since all other passwords can > be used from ZK. > > What do you think? > > > > On Wed, Jan 3, 2018 at 6:01 PM, Rajini Sivaram <rajinisiva...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Hi Jason, > > > > Thank you for reviewing and voting. > > > > Thanks, I had missed the rename. Have updated the KIP. > > > > The configs can be defined in the static server.properties or in > > ZooKeeper. If a ZK config cannot be decoded (or is not valid), we log an > > error and revert to the static config or default. When updating the > secret > > used by the encode, we expect all password values to be specified in > > server.properties. And the decoding or sanity check of the password in ZK > > would fail with the new secret, so we would use the password values from > > server.properties. Once the broker starts up, the values can be reset in > ZK > > using AdminClient and they will be encoded using the new secret. > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 3, 2018 at 5:34 PM, Jason Gustafson <ja...@confluent.io> > > wrote: > > > >> +1 Thanks for the KIP. One minor nit: I think we changed > >> ConfigSource.TOPIC_CONFIG to ConfigSource.DYNAMIC_TOPIC_CONFIG in the > PR. > >> > >> As far as updating secrets, I wasn't sure I understand how that will > work. > >> Do the password configs accept multiple values? > >> > >> On Wed, Jan 3, 2018 at 2:58 AM, Rajini Sivaram <rajinisiva...@gmail.com > > > >> wrote: > >> > >> > Hi Jun, > >> > > >> > Thank you for reviewing and voting. > >> > > >> > 50. I have updated the KIP to describe how the secret may be changed. > >> All > >> > dynamically configurable passwords and per-broker configs. So the > secret > >> > can be different across brokers and updated using rolling restart. In > >> order > >> > to update the secret, each broker needs to be restarted with an > updated > >> > server.properties which contains the new secret as well as the current > >> > values of all the password configs. Admin client can then be used to > >> update > >> > the passwords in ZooKeeper that are encrypted using the new secret. > >> > > >> > 51. leader.replication.throttled.replicas and > >> > follower.replication.throttled.replicas > >> > are dynamically configurable at the topic level. But there are no > >> defaults > >> > for these at the broker level since they refer to partitions of the > >> topic. > >> > The rates used for throttling were already configurable at the broker > >> > level. > >> > > >> > I made a couple of other changes to the KIP: > >> > > >> > 1. The config names used for encoding passwords are now prefixed with > >> > password.encoder. > >> > Also added key length as a config since this is constrained by the > >> > algorithm which is also configurable. > >> > 2. I moved the update of inter-broker security protocol and > >> > inter-broker sasl mechanism to the follow-on KIP under Future Work. As > >> part > >> > of the new KIP, we need to add protocol changes to validate that all > >> > brokers in the cluster support the new protocol/mechanism/version to > >> avoid > >> > accidental changes before all brokers are updated. > >> > > >> > > >> > On Tue, Jan 2, 2018 at 10:58 PM, Jun Rao <j...@confluent.io> wrote: > >> > > >> > > Hi, Rajini, > >> > > > >> > > Thank for the KIP. +1. Just a couple of minor comments below. > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > 50. config.secret.*: Could you document how the > encryption/decryption > >> of > >> > > passwd work? In particular, how do we support changing > config.secret? > >> > > > >> > > 51. At the topic level, we also have leader.replication.throttled. > >> > replicas > >> > > and follower.replication.throttled.replicas. Should they be > >> dynamically > >> > > configurable? > >> > > > >> > > Jun > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 9:24 AM, Gwen Shapira <g...@confluent.io> > >> wrote: > >> > > > >> > > > +1 (binding). Thank you for leading this, Rajini. > >> > > > > >> > > > On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 8:35 AM Tom Bentley < > t.j.bent...@gmail.com> > >> > > wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > > +1 (nonbinding) > >> > > > > > >> > > > > On 12 December 2017 at 15:34, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > +1 > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 5:44 AM, Rajini Sivaram < > >> > > > rajinisiva...@gmail.com > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > wrote: > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Since there are no more outstanding comments, I would like > to > >> > start > >> > > > > vote > >> > > > > > > for KIP-226: > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP- > >> > > > > > > 226+-+Dynamic+Broker+Configuration > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > The KIP enables dynamic update of commonly updated broker > >> > > > configuration > >> > > > > > > options to avoid expensive restarts. > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Thank you, > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Rajini > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > > >
