On 02/13/2015 04:19 PM, Morgan Fainberg wrote:
On February 13, 2015 at 11:51:10 AM, Lance Bragstad
(lbrags...@gmail.com <mailto:lbrags...@gmail.com>) wrote:
Hello all,
I'm proposing the Authenticated Encryption (AE) Token specification
[1] as an SPFE. AE tokens increases scalability of Keystone by
removing token persistence. This provider has been discussed prior
to, and at the Paris summit [2]. There is an implementation that is
currently up for review [3], that was built off a POC. Based on the
POC, there has been some performance analysis done with respect to
the token formats available in Keystone (UUID, PKI, PKIZ, AE) [4].
The Keystone team spent some time discussing limitations of the
current POC implementation at the mid-cycle. One case that still
needs to be addressed (and is currently being worked), is federated
tokens. When requesting unscoped federated tokens, the token contains
unbound groups which would need to be carried in the token. This case
can be handled by AE tokens but it would be possible for an unscoped
federated AE token to exceed an acceptable AE token length (i.e. <
255 characters). Long story short, a federation migration could be
used to ensure federated AE tokens never exceed a certain length.
Feel free to leave your comments on the AE Token spec.
Thanks!
Lance
[1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/130050/
[2] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/kilo-keystone-authorization
[3] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/145317/
[4] http://dolphm.com/benchmarking-openstack-keystone-token-formats/
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
I am for granting this exception as long as it’s clear that the
following is clear/true:
* All current use-cases for tokens (including federation) will be
supported by the new token provider.
* The federation tokens being possibly over 255 characters can be
addressed in the future if they are not addressed here (a “federation
migration” does not clearly state what is meant.
I think the length of the token is not a real issue. We need to keep
them within header lengths. That is 8k. Anything smaller than that
will work.
I think we start with federation usncoped tokens allowing a list of
groups. These tokens only go back and forth from user to Keyston
anyway, and should not got to other services.
I also have a concernt with the requirement for new cryptoloy.
Specificcally, the requirement for symmetric crypto and Keys management
can be a s ignificant barrier to organizations that have to meet
compliance rules. Since PKI tokens have already forced this issue, I
suggest we switch AE tokens to using PKI instead of symmetric crypto for
the default case. Putting in an optimization that uses symmetric crypto
as an enhancement should then be a future enhancement. Asymmetric
crypto will mitigate the issues with multiple keystone servers sharing
keys, and will remove the need for a key sharing mechanism. Since this
mechanism is in Keystone already, I think it is a realistic approach.
Symmetric crypto when coupled with the needs to have multiple Keystones
signing tokens is going to require something like Kite, which is not
part of the core OpenStack services. We don't currently rely on a key
sharing mechanism and I don't think this feature is worth forcing that
on the deployers.
I think with those two adjustments, AE tokens should be able to progress.
I am also ok with the AE token work being re-ordered ahead of the
provider cleanup to ensure it lands. Fixing the AE Token provider
along with PKI and UUID providers should be minimal extra work in the
cleanup.
This addresses a very, very big issue within Keystone as scaling
scaling up happens. There has been demand for solving token
persistence for ~3 cycles. The POC code makes this exception possible
to land within Kilo, whereas without the POC this would almost
assuredly need to be held until the L-Cycle.
TL;DR, I am for the exception if the AE Tokens support 100% of the
current use-cases of tokens (UUID or PKI) today.
—Morgan
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
