client: fix role permission issue with duplicate policies. #18419
Conversation
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 change deduplicates the ACL policy list generated from ACL roles referenced within an ACL token on the client. Previously the list could contain duplicates, which would cause erronous permission denied errors when calling client related RPC/ HTTP API endpoints. This is because the client calls the ACL get policies endpoint which subsequently ensures the caller has permission to view the ACL policies. This check is performed by comparing the requested list args with the policies referenced by the caller ACL token. When a duplicate is present, this check fails, as the check must ensure the slices match exactly.
jrasell
added
backport/1.4.x
This was referenced Sep 11, 2023
Merged
Merged
jrasell
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 11, 2023
This change deduplicates the ACL policy list generated from ACL roles referenced within an ACL token on the client. Previously the list could contain duplicates, which would cause erronous permission denied errors when calling client related RPC/ HTTP API endpoints. This is because the client calls the ACL get policies endpoint which subsequently ensures the caller has permission to view the ACL policies. This check is performed by comparing the requested list args with the policies referenced by the caller ACL token. When a duplicate is present, this check fails, as the check must ensure the slices match exactly.
jrasell
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 11, 2023
…18446) This change deduplicates the ACL policy list generated from ACL roles referenced within an ACL token on the client. Previously the list could contain duplicates, which would cause erronous permission denied errors when calling client related RPC/ HTTP API endpoints. This is because the client calls the ACL get policies endpoint which subsequently ensures the caller has permission to view the ACL policies. This check is performed by comparing the requested list args with the policies referenced by the caller ACL token. When a duplicate is present, this check fails, as the check must ensure the slices match exactly. Co-authored-by: James Rasell <jrasell@users.noreply.github.com>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
This change deduplicates the ACL policy list generated from ACL roles referenced within an ACL token on the client.
Previously the list could contain duplicates, which would cause erronous permission denied errors when calling client related RPC/ HTTP API endpoints. This is because the client calls the ACL get policies endpoint which subsequently ensures the caller has permission to view the ACL policies. This check is performed by comparing the requested list args with the policies referenced by the caller ACL token. When a duplicate is present, this check fails, as the check must ensure the slices match exactly.
The linked issue has details on how to reproduce the problem, if readers want to test this before and after the code changes.
Closes #17201