Skip to content

Commit

Permalink
docs: Add section on how to express "FOR ALL" in Rego
Browse files Browse the repository at this point in the history
This is a common question that comes up. Until we have a keyword that
lets users express "FOR ALL" we should have docs we can point to.

Fixes #1307

Signed-off-by: Torin Sandall <torinsandall@gmail.com>
  • Loading branch information
tsandall committed Jun 28, 2019
1 parent 00db473 commit 7d15f46
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Showing 2 changed files with 123 additions and 0 deletions.
92 changes: 92 additions & 0 deletions docs/content/how-do-i-write-policies.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -1053,6 +1053,98 @@ The result:
+-----------+------------------------+
```

## Universal Quantification (FOR ALL)

Like SQL, Rego does not have a direct way to express _universal quantification_
("FOR ALL"). However, like SQL, you can use other language primitives (e.g.,
[Negation](#negation)) to express FOR ALL. For example, imagine you want to
express a policy that says (in English):

```
There must be no apps named "bitcoin-miner".
```

A common mistake is to try encoding the policy with a rule named
`no_bitcoin_miners` like so:

```ruby
no_bitcoin_miners {
app := apps[_]
app.name != "bitcoin-miner" # THIS IS NOT CORRECT.
}
```

It becomes clear that this is incorrect when you use the [`some`](#some-keyword)
keyword, because the rule is true whenever there is SOME app that is not a
bitcoin-miner:

```ruby
no_bitcoin_miners {
some i
app := apps[i]
app.name != "bitcoin-miner"
}
```

You can confirm this by testing the rule inside the REPL:

```ruby
> no_bitcoin_miners with apps as [{"name": "bitcoin-miner"}, {"name": "web"}]
true
```

The reason the rule is incorrect is that variables in Rego are _existentially
quantified_. This means that rule bodies and queries express FOR ANY and not FOR
ALL. To express FOR ALL in Rego complement the logic in the rule body (e.g.,
`!=` becomes `==`) and then complement the check using negation (e.g.,
`no_bitcoin_miners` becomes `not any_bitcoin_miners`).

For this policy, you define a rule that finds if there exists a bitcoin-mining
app (which is easy using the `some` keyword). And then you use negation to check
that there is NO bitcoin-mining app. Technically, you're using 2 negations and
an existential quantifier, which is logically the same as a universal
quantifier.

For example:

```ruby
no_bitcoin_miners_using_negation {
not any_bitcoin_miners
}

any_bitcoin_miners {
some i
app := apps[i]
app.name == "bitcoin-miner"
}
```

```ruby
> no_bitcoin_miners_using_negation with apps as [{"name": "web"}]
true
> no_bitcoin_miners_using_negation with apps as [{"name": "bitcoin-miner"}, {"name": "web"}]
undefined
```

> The `undefined` result above is expected because we did not define a default
> value for `no_bitcoin_miners_using_negation`. Since the body of the rule fails
> to match, there is no value generated.
Alternatively, we can implement the same kind of logic inside a single rule
using [Comprehensions](#comprehensions).

```ruby
no_bitcoin_miners_using_comprehension {
bitcoin_miners := {app | app := apps[_]; app.name == "bitcoin-miner"}
count(bitcoin_miners) == 0
}
```

> Whether you use negation or comprehensions to express FOR ALL is up to you.
> The comprehension version is more concise and does not require a helper rule
> while the negation version is more verbose but a bit simpler and allows for
> more complex ORs.
## Modules

In Rego, policies are defined inside *modules*. Modules consist of:
Expand Down
31 changes: 31 additions & 0 deletions docs/content/language-cheatsheet.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -74,6 +74,9 @@ not obj.foo.bar.bar
# check if "foo" belongs to the set
a_set["foo"]

# check if "foo" DOES NOT belong to the set
not a_set["foo"]

# check if the array ["a", "b", "c"] belongs to the set
a_set[["a", "b", "c"]]

Expand Down Expand Up @@ -132,6 +135,34 @@ foo[k1] == foo[k2]; k1 != k2
foo[k].bar.baz[i] == 7; foo[k].qux > 3
```

#### For All

```ruby
# assert no values in set match predicate
count({x | set[x]; f(x)}) == 0

# assert all values in set make function f true
count({x | set[x]; f(x)}) == count(set)

# assert no values in set make function f true (using negation and helper rule)
not any_match

# assert all values in set make function f true (using negation and helper rule)
not any_not_match
```

```ruby
any_match {
set[x]
f(x)
}

any_not_match {
set[x]
not f(x)
}
```

## Rules

In the examples below `...` represents one or more conditions.
Expand Down

0 comments on commit 7d15f46

Please sign in to comment.