fmorg-git commented on code in PR #11053:
URL: https://github.com/apache/ozone/pull/11053#discussion_r4278186434


##########
hadoop-hdds/docs/content/design/s3-object-lock.md:
##########
@@ -203,7 +241,18 @@ To enable action-level authorization and onboard Object 
Lock actions into the Oz
   ```properties
   ranger.servicedef.ozone.enableActionMatcherInPoliciesCondition=true
   ```
-* When enabled, Ozone S3 Gateway (S3G) intercepts the high-level S3 API 
operation and populates the S3 action name into the `RangerAccessRequest`, 
allowing Ranger's `RangerActionMatcher` to evaluate policy conditions against 
incoming requests.
+* When enabled, the S3 action name in the `RangerAccessRequest` is evaluated 
by Ranger's `RangerActionMatcher` against policy conditions.
+  Without this flag, Ranger ignores the action and only checks the primitive 
access type (for example, plain `WRITE` for `PutObjectLegalHold`),
+  so this flag is a prerequisite for using Object Lock with Ranger.
+
+**OM Determines the Object Lock Action**:
+* Today OM forwards `S3Authentication.s3Action` from S3 Gateway to Ranger as 
is, and only when `ozone.s3g.sts.http.enabled=true` (default `false`).
+  For Object Lock, OM must not depend on that string, because a wrong mapping 
in S3 Gateway, a native client that sends no action,
+  or STS being disabled would all reduce the check to plain `WRITE`.
+* Instead, each Object Lock OM request sets the S3 action in the 
`RequestContext` itself, based on the request type:
+  `OMKeySetLegalHoldRequest` always checks `PutObjectLegalHold`, 
`OMKeySetRetentionRequest` checks `PutObjectRetention`, the bucket request 
checks `PutBucketObjectLockConfiguration`,
+  and any request with `bypassGovernanceRetention = true` additionally checks 
`BypassGovernanceRetention`.
+* As a result, Object Lock with Ranger does not require STS to be enabled, and 
S3 Gateway, native clients and STS sessions are checked the same way.

Review Comment:
   It was a good observation by @Gargi-jais11 that actions are only sent in 
S3Gateway and Ranger if STS is enabled (they were only needed for STS at that 
point).  The reason STS flag was not defaulted to true is because the Ranger 
team defaulted their flag to false and if the STS flag is true and the Ranger 
flag is false, there would be security issues.  However, I'm concerned that the 
approach outlined in this design would have actions being set in multiple 
places like S3gActionIamMapper and in these new requests like 
OMKeySetLegalHoldRequest so the maintenance becomes more difficult.   Would it 
be feasible to separate the actions being sent in S3Gateway and RequestContext 
from the STS flag? @ChenSammi thoughts?



-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to