Having NiFi enforce authentication by default seems like the right way to go, especially given the capabilities of the system.
Bryan raises a good point about storage of account information, so weighing the positives and negatives of various identity providers should be considered. Following on Joe's point about disabling plain HTTP, one option could be generating both client and server certificates and using Mutual TLS for authentication. This would obviously require installing the client certificate in a browser, which is not trivial, but could be part of an installation guide. This approach definitely provides a high barrier of entry of new users, but provides a strong level of security while avoiding the need for some other identity provider service to be configured. As others have mentioned, this seems necessary to address the situation of someone installing NiFi without a full understanding of the configuration required, so it is important to keep the audience in mind when evaluating a solution. Regards, David Handermann On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 7:39 AM Bryan Bende <[email protected]> wrote: > Just to clarify, I was not suggesting that we make a default secure > setup that requires LDAP. > > I was just saying that in order to provide a default secure setup, > we'd have to provide a login identity provider implementation that is > backed by a file or database table, which in the past we decided > against. > > On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 8:28 AM Russell Bateman <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > I second the concerns expressed, but second especially Bryan's pointing > > out that requiring LDAP/AD to be set up in order even to begin to use > > our framework would be a bit onerous for developers just interested in > > getting work done and a barrier to considering the framework should it > > be erected a little too high. Should we at least glance at how this is > > solved by the likes of other projects, Kafka and Cassandra come to mind, > > even if it means resorting to a store of a name or two? I didn't find > > getting into developing with them a pain, but making me jump through the > > hoop of setting up LDAP may very well have changed that. > > > > These unsecure instances of NiFi out there are not our community's > > fault. I suppose we're worried about getting splattered by bad press? > > > > On 2/10/21 5:47 AM, Bryan Bende wrote: > > > I agree with the overall idea, although I would think it requires a > > > major release to make this kind of change to the default behavior. > > > > > > Also, we have always avoided NiFi being a store of usernames and > > > passwords, so we don't have a login provider that uses a local file or > > > a database, we've always said you connect to LDAP/AD for that. > > > > > > Obviously it can be implemented, but just pointing out that we'd have > > > to change our stance here if we want to provide a default username and > > > password to authenticate with. > > > > > > On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 11:25 PM Andrew Grande <[email protected]> > wrote: > > >> Mysql has been generating an admin password on default installs for, > like, > > >> forever. This workflow should be familiar for many users. > > >> > > >> I'd suggest taking the automation tooling into account and how a > production > > >> rollout (user-provided password) would fit into the workflow. > > >> > > >> Andrew > > >> > > >> On Tue, Feb 9, 2021, 8:15 PM Tony Kurc <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > > >>> Joe, > > >>> In addition to your suggestions, were you thinking of making this > processor > > >>> disabled by default as well? > > >>> > > >>> Tony > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> On Tue, Feb 9, 2021, 11:04 PM Joe Witt <[email protected]> wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> Team > > >>>> > > >>>> While secure by default may not be practical perhaps ‘not blatantly > wide > > >>>> open’ by default should be adopted. > > >>>> > > >>>> I think we should consider killing support for http entirely and > support > > >>>> only https. We should consider auto generating a user and password > and > > >>>> possibly server cert if nothing is configured and log the generated > user > > >>>> and password. Sure it could still be configured to be non secure > but > > >>> that > > >>>> would truly be an admins fault. Now its just ‘on’ > > >>>> > > >>>> This tweet is a great example of why > > >>>> > > >>>> https://twitter.com/_escctrl_/status/1359280656174510081?s=21 > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> Who agrees? Who disagrees? Please share ideas. > > >>>> > > >>>> Thanks > > >>>> >
