[jira] [Commented] (AIRAVATA-2840) Secure GroupResourceProfiles from being cloned and repurposed

["ASF subversion and git services (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>]

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRAVATA-2840?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16551085#comment-16551085 ] 

ASF subversion and git services commented on AIRAVATA-2840:
-----------------------------------------------------------

Commit ca4d613ddb114f5502f03eaf6736104d7b4f415e in airavata's branch refs/heads/develop from [~marcuschristie]
[ https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=airavata.git;h=ca4d613 ]

AIRAVATA-2839 Removing validation

Changes in AIRAVATA-2840 will require GroupResourceProfiles provide
their own allocation numbers and credential tokens.


> Secure GroupResourceProfiles from being cloned and repurposed
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: AIRAVATA-2840
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRAVATA-2840
>             Project: Airavata
>          Issue Type: Bug
>            Reporter: Marcus Christie
>            Assignee: Marcus Christie
>            Priority: Major
>
> Email to dev list:
> {quote}
> Hi All,
> I’m looking for some advice on how to secure GroupResourceProfiles. The problem is this: any user that has READ access to a GroupResourceProfile can effectively clone that GroupResourceProfile. This would allow the user to create a new GroupResourceProfile that uses the same login/allocation and this new GroupResourceProfile could have fewer restrictions or be shared with other users.
> Here are some solutions I’m considering:
> 1. Create a new permission type that is less privileged than READ and that gives access to less details. There are a few details in the GroupComputeResourcePreferences that are sensitive, like loginUserName, resourceSpecificCredentialToken and allocationProjectNumber, because these fields determine what account gets charged and these could be left out.
> 2. Hide the sensitive fields mentioned above from users with READ access and only show them to users with WRITE access.
> 3. Apply group based authorization to credential tokens and require new GroupResourceProfiles to have their own credential tokens, that would only be accessible to the user that creates the GroupResourceProfile.
> I’m open to other ideas. I’m leaning toward #2. The problem with #1 is it introduces another permission type (READ, WRITE and “USE”?) that will complicate the user experience. #3 also complicates what is required to create a GroupResourceProfile. One use case we have in mind is that users who create a GroupResourceProfile can leverage defaults defined in the GatewayResourceProfile and thus only need to provide an allocation project number and not need to add an SSH key to a compute resource account. Approach #3 would make that more difficult or impossible.
> I hope the above makes sense. Let me know if you have any questions.
> Thanks,
> Marcus
> {quote}



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)