KAFKA-14265: Prefix ACLs may shadow other prefix ACLs#12695
Merged
Conversation
65a88f2 to
ba89eaf
Compare
hachikuji
reviewed
Sep 29, 2022
hachikuji
left a comment
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good find. The fix LGTM, but we probably need some test cases.
| // scanning in case there are any relevant PREFIX ACLs. | ||
| continue; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
Contributor
Author
|
I added two tests. One unit test and one integration test. I verified that both fail without the fix. The integration tests succeeds with AclAuthorizer prior to the StandardAuthorizer fix. |
Contributor
|
The build is failing due to the newly added test: |
3 tasks
Member
|
Looks like we didn't squash this PR before merging. Let's avoid that next time please. |
hachikuji
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 4, 2022
In #12695, we discovered a gap in our testing of `StandardAuthorizer`. We addressed the specific case that was failing, but I think we need to establish a better methodology for testing which incorporates randomized inputs. This patch is a start in that direction. We implement a few basic property tests using jqwik which focus on prefix searching. It catches the case from #12695 prior to the fix. In the future, we can extend this to cover additional operation types, principal matching, etc. Reviewers: David Arthur <mumrah@gmail.com>
cmccabe
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 24, 2022
In #12695, we discovered a gap in our testing of `StandardAuthorizer`. We addressed the specific case that was failing, but I think we need to establish a better methodology for testing which incorporates randomized inputs. This patch is a start in that direction. We implement a few basic property tests using jqwik which focus on prefix searching. It catches the case from #12695 prior to the fix. In the future, we can extend this to cover additional operation types, principal matching, etc. Reviewers: David Arthur <mumrah@gmail.com>
guozhangwang
pushed a commit
to guozhangwang/kafka
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 25, 2023
In apache#12695, we discovered a gap in our testing of `StandardAuthorizer`. We addressed the specific case that was failing, but I think we need to establish a better methodology for testing which incorporates randomized inputs. This patch is a start in that direction. We implement a few basic property tests using jqwik which focus on prefix searching. It catches the case from apache#12695 prior to the fix. In the future, we can extend this to cover additional operation types, principal matching, etc. Reviewers: David Arthur <mumrah@gmail.com>
rutvijmehta-harness
pushed a commit
to rutvijmehta-harness/kafka
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 9, 2024
In apache#12695, we discovered a gap in our testing of `StandardAuthorizer`. We addressed the specific case that was failing, but I think we need to establish a better methodology for testing which incorporates randomized inputs. This patch is a start in that direction. We implement a few basic property tests using jqwik which focus on prefix searching. It catches the case from apache#12695 prior to the fix. In the future, we can extend this to cover additional operation types, principal matching, etc. Reviewers: David Arthur <mumrah@gmail.com>
rutvijmehta-harness
added a commit
to rutvijmehta-harness/kafka
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 9, 2024
… (#34) In apache#12695, we discovered a gap in our testing of `StandardAuthorizer`. We addressed the specific case that was failing, but I think we need to establish a better methodology for testing which incorporates randomized inputs. This patch is a start in that direction. We implement a few basic property tests using jqwik which focus on prefix searching. It catches the case from apache#12695 prior to the fix. In the future, we can extend this to cover additional operation types, principal matching, etc. Reviewers: David Arthur <mumrah@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Jason Gustafson <jason@confluent.io>
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
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.
Prefix ACLs may shadow other prefix ACLs. Consider the case where we have prefix ACLs for foobar, fooa, and f. If we were matching a resource named "foobar", we'd start scanning at the foobar ACL, hit the fooa ACL, and stop – missing the f ACL.
To fix this, we should re-scan for ACLs at the first divergence point (in this case, f) whenever we hit a mismatch of this kind.