[GitHub] [pulsar] Geal opened a new pull request #5718: [Issue 5712][broker] Auth provider superuser

[GitBox <gi...@apache.org>]

Geal opened a new pull request #5718: [Issue 5712][broker] Auth provider superuser
URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/5718
 
 
   work in progress for #5712 *do not merge*
   
   ### Motivation
   
   This PR changes superuser role checks to go through the authorisation provider instead. Without this change, authorisation provider will not be able to validate admin access on tenants and namespaces.
   
   ### Modifications
   
   queries the authorization provider instead of read options from the configuration file. With the default authorization provider, this does not change the behaviour, as it will query the configuration file options too.
   This PR starts from the v2.4.1 tag as it makes it easier for my tests, but I'll rebase it once I get it to work.
   
   ### Verifying this change
   
   - [ ] Make sure that the change passes the CI checks.
   
   *(Please pick either of the following options)*
   
   This change is a trivial rework / code cleanup without any test coverage.
   
   *(or)*
   
   This change is already covered by existing tests, such as *(please describe tests)*.
   
   *(or)*
   
   This change added tests and can be verified as follows:
   
   *(example:)*
     - *Added integration tests for end-to-end deployment with large payloads (10MB)*
     - *Extended integration test for recovery after broker failure*
   
   ### Does this pull request potentially affect one of the following parts:
   
   *If `yes` was chosen, please highlight the changes*
   
     - Dependencies (does it add or upgrade a dependency): no
     - The public API: no
     - The schema: no
     - The default values of configurations: no
     - The wire protocol: no
     - The rest endpoints: *yes*
     - The admin cli options: no
     - Anything that affects deployment: don't know
   
   ### Documentation
   
     - Does this pull request introduce a new feature? no
     - If yes, how is the feature documented? (not applicable / docs / JavaDocs / not documented)
     - If a feature is not applicable for documentation, explain why?
     - If a feature is not documented yet in this PR, please create a followup issue for adding the documentation
   

----------------------------------------------------------------
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.
 
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org


With regards,
Apache Git Services