GEODE-3974: Improve permissions for geode-modules functions #1258
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,89 @@ | ||
| /* | ||
| * Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one or more contributor license | ||
| * agreements. See the NOTICE file distributed with this work for additional information regarding | ||
| * copyright ownership. The ASF licenses this file to You under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the | ||
| * "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance with the License. You may obtain a | ||
| * copy of the License at | ||
| * | ||
| * http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 | ||
| * | ||
| * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software distributed under the License | ||
| * is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express | ||
| * or implied. See the License for the specific language governing permissions and limitations under | ||
| * the License. | ||
| */ | ||
|
|
||
| package org.apache.geode.modules.util; | ||
|
|
||
| import org.junit.BeforeClass; | ||
| import org.junit.ClassRule; | ||
| import org.junit.Rule; | ||
| import org.junit.Test; | ||
| import org.junit.experimental.categories.Category; | ||
|
|
||
| import org.apache.geode.cache.RegionShortcut; | ||
| import org.apache.geode.cache.execute.FunctionService; | ||
| import org.apache.geode.examples.SimpleSecurityManager; | ||
| import org.apache.geode.test.junit.categories.IntegrationTest; | ||
| import org.apache.geode.test.junit.rules.ConnectionConfiguration; | ||
| import org.apache.geode.test.junit.rules.GfshCommandRule; | ||
| import org.apache.geode.test.junit.rules.ServerStarterRule; | ||
|
|
||
| @Category(IntegrationTest.class) | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. I know we don't really just them for anything, but this deserves the |
||
| public class ModuleFunctionsSecurityTest { | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Should there not be any positive testing for these commands? That'll make the interaction a lot more complicated, true, but it seems strange that we'd only test some selective negatives here and assume positive security coverage elsewhere. There was a problem hiding this comment. Discussed with @jinmeiliao which is why I removed them. The tests are targeted to ensure that these functions require specific permissions and not that the security framework is working. |
||
|
|
||
| @ClassRule | ||
| public static ServerStarterRule server = | ||
| new ServerStarterRule().withJMXManager().withSecurityManager(SimpleSecurityManager.class) | ||
| .withRegion(RegionShortcut.REPLICATE, "REPLICATE_1") | ||
| .withRegion(RegionShortcut.PARTITION, "PARTITION_1").withAutoStart(); | ||
|
|
||
| @Rule | ||
| public GfshCommandRule gfsh = new GfshCommandRule(server::getJmxPort, GfshCommandRule.PortType.jmxManager); | ||
|
|
||
| @BeforeClass | ||
| public static void setupClass() { | ||
| FunctionService.registerFunction(new BootstrappingFunction()); | ||
| FunctionService.registerFunction(new CreateRegionFunction()); | ||
| FunctionService.registerFunction(new RegionSizeFunction()); | ||
| FunctionService.registerFunction(new TouchPartitionedRegionEntriesFunction()); | ||
| FunctionService.registerFunction(new TouchReplicatedRegionEntriesFunction()); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @Test | ||
| @ConnectionConfiguration(user = "dataWrite", password = "dataWrite") | ||
| public void testInvalidPermissionsForBootstrappingFunction() throws Exception { | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Another way to have the test auto connect with a specific user/password is to do this: @rule // instead of a classrule so that it connect/disconnect around each test @test |
||
| gfsh.executeAndAssertThat("execute function --id=" + BootstrappingFunction.ID) | ||
| .containsOutput("not authorized for CLUSTER:MANAGE").statusIsSuccess(); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @Test | ||
| @ConnectionConfiguration(user = "dataWrite", password = "dataWrite") | ||
| public void testInvalidPermissionsForCreateRegionFunction() throws Exception { | ||
| gfsh.executeAndAssertThat("execute function --id=" + CreateRegionFunction.ID) | ||
| .containsOutput("not authorized for DATA:MANAGE").statusIsSuccess(); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @Test | ||
| @ConnectionConfiguration(user = "dataWrite", password = "dataWrite") | ||
| public void testInvalidPermissionsForRegionSizeFunction() throws Exception { | ||
| gfsh.executeAndAssertThat("execute function --region=REPLICATE_1 --id=" + RegionSizeFunction.ID) | ||
| .containsOutput("not authorized for DATA:READ:REPLICATE_1").statusIsSuccess(); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @Test | ||
| @ConnectionConfiguration(user = "dataWrite", password = "dataWrite") | ||
| public void testInvalidPermissionsForTouchPartitionedRegionEntriesFunction() throws Exception { | ||
| gfsh.executeAndAssertThat( | ||
| "execute function --region=PARTITION_1 --id=" + TouchPartitionedRegionEntriesFunction.ID) | ||
| .containsOutput("not authorized for DATA:READ:PARTITION_1").statusIsSuccess(); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @Test | ||
| @ConnectionConfiguration(user = "dataWrite", password = "dataWrite") | ||
| public void testInvalidPermissionsForTouchReplicatedRegionEntriesFunction() throws Exception { | ||
| gfsh.executeAndAssertThat( | ||
| "execute function --region=REPLICATE_1 --id=" + TouchReplicatedRegionEntriesFunction.ID) | ||
| .containsOutput("not authorized for DATA:READ:REPLICATE_1").statusIsSuccess(); | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think this would be a good opportunity to eliminate the
CacheFactory.getAnyInstance()call above. The cache should be available through the FunctionConext.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm going to open a separate Jira for that - it seems a bit orthogonal to what's in this PR. (GEODE-4262).