[jira] [Commented] (COUCHDB-1475) _users design documents access

["Jean-Pierre Fiset (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>]

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-1475?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13630336#comment-13630336 ] 

Jean-Pierre Fiset commented on COUCHDB-1475:
--------------------------------------------

I agree that this needs to be revisited. I wish that the _users database was consistent with other databases. Currently, I want some roles to be able to manage other users, which requires access to some views. Yet, I do not wish to give those roles the ability to change the design document.

It seems that the "members" section of the security document is useless in the case of the _users database.
                
> _users design documents access
> ------------------------------
>
>                 Key: COUCHDB-1475
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-1475
>             Project: CouchDB
>          Issue Type: Question
>          Components: Database Core
>    Affects Versions: 1.2
>         Environment: Debian/testing
>            Reporter: Stéphane Alnet
>            Priority: Minor
>
> Sorry I'm coming in late on this topic, I found this while testing my existing code against 1.2.0.
> The comments for commit e5503ffef957dc5e8784c7223e318738ae79b6df indicate for `after_doc_read`:
>           If the doc is a design doc and the userCtx doesn't identify
>           an admin or db-admin:
>           -> 403 // Forbidden
> This breaks the (previously working) case where access to the _users database is restricted using a "members" security property, and authorized users could use a couchapp found in the _users database to manager user records.
> (These power-users would have, say, "user_manager_ro" and "user_manager_rw" roles assigned to them, with the ro/rw aspect handled by a specific validate_doc_udpate() which would be part of the couchapp; the roles were entered in the _users' database members.roles security field.)
> Pointing me back to a discussion explaining the background for this new behavior would be sufficient, if it is effectively a desirable side-effect and things will remain as they are. Otherwise it seems a finer-grained logic for after_doc_read() would be able to restore the desired result, along the lines of:
>           If the doc is a design doc and (there are no security members.roles and no members.names) and (the userCtx doesn't identify
>           an admin or db-admin)
>           -> 403 // Forbidden
> Thanks,
> S.
> PS: Overall I'm surprised the changes in that commit used new Erlang code rather than suggesting best-practices using the exisiting security features. I don't understand how hiding the design documents enhances security ("security by obscurity"), but that's beyond what I'm asking here.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira