Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

uis: authorise endpoint for multi-user use #202

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Apr 16, 2021

Conversation

oliver-sanders
Copy link
Member

@oliver-sanders oliver-sanders commented Apr 9, 2021

This adds a trivial authorisation scheme to the UIS which rejects anyone but the UIS user.

addresses: #10, #171
opens and closes #203

This will be followed by a configurable authorisation scheme in due course.

For testing, change the value of ME or try with a second user account. For now manual testing only, can implement automated next release.

Requirements check-list

  • I have read CONTRIBUTING.md and added my name as a Code Contributor.
  • Contains logically grouped changes (else tidy your branch by rebase).
  • Does not contain off-topic changes (use other PRs for other changes).
  • Appropriate tests are included (see above)
  • Appropriate change log entry included.
  • No documentation update required.
  • No dependency changes.

@oliver-sanders oliver-sanders self-assigned this Apr 9, 2021
@oliver-sanders oliver-sanders added this to the cylc-uiserver 0.4.0 milestone Apr 9, 2021
@oliver-sanders
Copy link
Member Author

oliver-sanders commented Apr 9, 2021

Four tests are unhappy due to unsatisfied auth.

Mocked authorisation for tests.

logger = logging.getLogger(__name__)


ME = getpass.getuser()
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Not sure if this would work for every JupyterHub authenticator? Maybe for some users the user database is stored in a database, external system, etc. So maybe getpass.getuser() would lock us to linux & pam only?

Copy link
Member Author

@oliver-sanders oliver-sanders Apr 13, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In order for the UIS to run the user has to exist on the system so it should be good for most things but in more esoteric systems where the authenticated user does not match any system user it would break yes (although I'm not sure how the hub could spawn UI Servers in this case).

We will add the ability to configure authorisation (i.e. grant access to different accounts) that should help us to handle this sort of thing.

For example we could do something along the line of this:

[authorisation]
  [[alice]]  # authorised user name
    read = True
  [[bob]]  # authorised user name
    read = True
    write = True
  [[ME]]  # my authorised user name if it differs
    read = True
    write = True
    execute = True

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Maybe we could use Tornado's current_user then?

When the hub is configured to use PAM, it will match what user you have logged in. Then we can compare that against the request path.

So if I logged in with a database backed authenticator and have the user kinow, but I'm accessing the URL /#/workflows/userx|one, then our code to authorise would just match current_user (kinow from the database in this case, but would work with PAM, etc) and fail if I don't have authorization I think?

Also, if we run Cylc UIS with root or another superuser, what would getpass.getuser() return? Wouldn't it return root instead of the logged-in user?

Copy link
Member Author

@oliver-sanders oliver-sanders Apr 13, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

At the moment this should fail all authenticated users except for the user account under which the UIS is running.

Also, if we run Cylc UIS with root or another superuser

The UIS should never be run as root. It is only run under a regular system user.

The Hub could be run under an privileged account (e.g. root) so that it could spawn UI Servers under regular user accounts, (although, until we have proper authentication there is little advantage to doing this).

Copy link
Member Author

@oliver-sanders oliver-sanders Apr 13, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think current_user is the result of get_current_user which returns the authenticated user who performed the request.

https://github.com/tornadoweb/tornado/blob/cef029abd244cd796ea36487050f722a57bfab60/tornado/web.py#L1303-L1337

We need to know the user that the UIS is running under.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ah yeah, you are correct, the UIS should be with my own user, my bad!

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

in more esoteric systems where the authenticated user does not match any system user it would break yes (although I'm not sure how the hub could spawn UI Servers in this case).

Not sure that's true. The authenticator doesn't have to know about users on the target system where the UIS and Schedulers run. So long as our authorization system doesn't require the authenticated user to be valid in its domain, we should be able to authorize "alien" users to access the workflows, no?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

(We do of course have to trust that the authentication system has been configured safely).

Copy link
Member Author

@oliver-sanders oliver-sanders Apr 15, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

we should be able to authorize "alien" users to access the workflows, no?

Yes, however, those users won't be able to start UI Servers as they would have no account to spawn the UIS under.

(This thread was about the use of getpass.getuser() in the UIS for determining the name of UIS owner.)

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

OK, you're talking about the current PR, not where we're heading (any authenticated user can spawn a UIS on other users' accounts).

Comment on lines 65 to 71
# TODO: can't get this test to run due to handler setup?
# @pytest.mark.usefixtures("mock_authentication_none")
# def test_unauthenticated(self) -> None:
# """Test 403 HTTP response (unauthenticated)."""
# response = self.fetch('/')
# assert response.code == 403
# # assert response.reason == 'Forbidden'
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I get 500 errors for these tests as the UIS hits an internal error before authentication has the change to fail.

Should find a way to configure things so these tests run in the future, in the mean time can test manually (behaviour unchanged).

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Copy link
Contributor

@datamel datamel left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Does the job as expected with regards to the need to secure the UI Server now so I'm happy to get this merged in for the beta 1. I have manually attempted to break into another user uiserver and can see this branch fixes the issue.

Have a couple of queries which don't affect approval...

  • Are you sure the nonlocal is needed with wrapped function arguments?
  • Probably don't need to override run and may also be more secure to override post instead? Both of these comments are tested on my POC PR: Configurable Authorization #204.

Thanks for getting this fixed @oliver-sanders!

Copy link
Member

@MetRonnie MetRonnie left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Haven't managed to use the UI (see Teams) but tests pass, LGTM

Update: tested with cylc.uiserver.handlers.ME = 'darmok' and I get the "403: authorisation insufficient" message when launching the cylc hub, as expected

lambda x: ret
)

_mock_authentication()
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why does it need to call the inner function itself?

@oliver-sanders
Copy link
Member Author

Are you sure the nonlocal is needed with wrapped function arguments?

Needed 100% of the time, no.

I use nonlocal whenever I'm getting a variable from outside of the defined scope. Sometimes it is stictly necessary, sometimes it is not. It is less ambiguous to use nonlocal and serves as a sanity check as it will fail if the value is defined locally. It also saves Python the bother of poking around the local scope looking for something which we know won't be there there, and, as an added bonus It is an indication to others that the variable is stored in a higher level scope, i.e. "don't mess with this value, it may be reused".

Probably don't need to override run and may also be more secure to override post instead?

Probably right, I followed the "better safe than sorry" on that one. I did try overriding post but had issues with 500 errors although that might have been before I changed the inheritance order.

cylc/uiserver/handlers.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@kinow
Copy link
Member

kinow commented Apr 14, 2021

Tested with the LocalProcessSpawner and it worked fine (single user, his own hub & UIS).

Tested with SudoSpawner and at the moment getting several

2021-04-14 13:27:26,265 cylc.uiserver.websockets DEBUG    Unauthenticated WebSocket request!
2021-04-14 13:27:26,267 tornado.access WARNING  403 GET /user/kinow/subscriptions (127.0.0.1) 4.38ms
2021-04-14 13:28:26,317 cylc.uiserver.websockets DEBUG    Unauthenticated WebSocket request!
2021-04-14 13:28:26,320 tornado.access WARNING  403 GET /user/kinow/subscriptions (127.0.0.1) 10.12ms

One tab has kinow logged-in, and I can see the workflows stopped fine in the UI.

The other tab has cylc1 logged-in (still have this user from the first time I tested Sudo Spawner in 2019? 😆 ), but his tab keeps loading and it appears websockets are not happy. I might have something missing in the cylc1 environment.

Hub is running as root (too lazy to set up the environment the way they recommend).

image

(above the incognito tab has cylc1 with a GraphQL websocket connection open, but a single message sent, nothing else after minutes running 😕 )

image

@kinow
Copy link
Member

kinow commented Apr 14, 2021

Tested on Firefox, got the same behavior. Then, since I had two tabs, one with kinow working fine, and one with cylc1 kinda broken, I tried accessing http://localhost:8000/user/kinow/#/workflows/complex from the tab logged-in as cylc1. And I got the following screen.

image

Then pressing Authorize I got:

image

So looks like the authorization code in this PR worked! Just trying to understand why my UI is not working for cylc1 😥 but maybe it was broken before this change too. Let me try with master.

@kinow
Copy link
Member

kinow commented Apr 14, 2021

BTW, stopping the Hub with 2 UIS's running with the Sudo Spawner, it tidily stopped the processes and logged everything (cc @jarich).

image

Copy link
Member

@kinow kinow left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

On master I also cannot use the second user... or at least it doesn't show anything in the UI. So for a separate issue.

Only thing that's happening in this PR is that when I open cylc1, there are no warnings in the console. But when I open kinow UIS, even without trying to access cylc1's UIS, I get:

2021-04-14 14:00:23,157 cylc.uiserver.websockets DEBUG    Unauthenticated WebSocket request!

Every few seconds a new line like this. I only have one tab open, with the user logged in.

Maybe I need to install something for cylc1? Maybe it needs to have at least 1 workflow? I tried creating ~/cylc-run, but it still failed when I opened the UI 😕

Solved! In the virtual machine, I had a browser minimized with a tab with my kinow user, but logged out. Then websocket connection was still open, causing the warnings! 👍

Co-authored-by: Bruno P. Kinoshita <[email protected]>
@codecov-io
Copy link

Codecov Report

Merging #202 (f97485f) into master (17ec81a) will increase coverage by 0.66%.
The diff coverage is 90.47%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #202      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   72.42%   73.09%   +0.66%     
==========================================
  Files          10       10              
  Lines         729      762      +33     
  Branches      117      120       +3     
==========================================
+ Hits          528      557      +29     
- Misses        180      184       +4     
  Partials       21       21              
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
cylc/uiserver/handlers.py 81.30% <90.47%> (+2.41%) ⬆️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 17ec81a...f97485f. Read the comment docs.

@oliver-sanders
Copy link
Member Author

Good to know, I had spotted that warning at some point in the past.

Copy link
Member

@kinow kinow left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think we are checking authorization multiple times for some requests, but would have to debug it to confirm.

@oliver-sanders for the TODO tests, there's a few things that we can change so that they pass

  1. Add a cookie secret for the application (otherwise authentication is not even handled properly (see the application in the code snippet)
  2. Add a handler for the login URL (unauthenticated requests are not 403'd, instead they are redirected to the login URL I think? at least that's the way UIS works at the moment)
  3. Confirm that we were redirected (or maybe force Tornado to throw 403, even though that's not how UIS works)

Here's how I got both TODO's removed, and the tests passing locally

diff --git a/cylc/uiserver/tests/test_handlers.py b/cylc/uiserver/tests/test_handlers.py
index 0cc911f..a0266ce 100644
--- a/cylc/uiserver/tests/test_handlers.py
+++ b/cylc/uiserver/tests/test_handlers.py
@@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ from graphql_ws.constants import GRAPHQL_WS
 from tornado.httpclient import HTTPResponse
 from tornado.httputil import HTTPServerRequest
 from tornado.testing import AsyncHTTPTestCase, get_async_test_timeout
-from tornado.web import Application, HTTPError
+from tornado.web import Application, RequestHandler
 
 from cylc.uiserver.main import (
     MainHandler,
@@ -36,6 +36,12 @@ from cylc.uiserver.main import (
 import pytest
 
 
+class NoOpHandler(RequestHandler):
+
+    def get(self):
+        pass
+
+
 class MainHandlerTest(AsyncHTTPTestCase):
     """Test for the Main handler"""
 
@@ -43,8 +49,10 @@ class MainHandlerTest(AsyncHTTPTestCase):
         self.tempdir = tempfile.mkdtemp(suffix='mainhandlertest')
         return MyApplication(
             handlers=[
-                ('/', MainHandler, {"path": self.tempdir})
-            ]
+                ('/', MainHandler, {"path": self.tempdir}),
+                ('/hub/api/oauth2/authorize.*', NoOpHandler)
+            ],
+            cookie_secret='MainHandlerTest'
         )
 
     @pytest.mark.usefixtures("mock_authentication")
@@ -62,13 +70,12 @@ class MainHandlerTest(AsyncHTTPTestCase):
         response = self.fetch('/')
         assert response.code == 500
 
-    # TODO: can't get this test to run due to handler setup?
-    # @pytest.mark.usefixtures("mock_authentication_none")
-    # def test_unauthenticated(self) -> None:
-    #     """Test 403 HTTP response (unauthenticated)."""
-    #     response = self.fetch('/')
-    #     assert response.code == 403
-    #     # assert response.reason == 'Forbidden'
+    @pytest.mark.usefixtures("mock_authentication_none")
+    def test_unauthenticated(self) -> None:
+        """Test login URL redirect response (unauthenticated)."""
+        response = self.fetch('/')
+        assert response.code == 200
+        assert response.effective_url.index('/hub/api/oauth2/authorize') > 0
 
     @pytest.mark.usefixtures("mock_authentication_yossarian")
     def test_unauthorised(self):
@@ -88,8 +95,10 @@ class UserProfileHandlerTest(AsyncHTTPTestCase):
     def get_app(self) -> Application:
         return MyApplication(
             handlers=[
-                ('/userprofile', UserProfileHandler)
-            ]
+                ('/userprofile', UserProfileHandler),
+                ('/hub/api/oauth2/authorize.*', NoOpHandler)
+            ],
+            cookie_secret='MainHandlerTest'
         )
 
     @pytest.mark.usefixtures("mock_authentication")
@@ -107,13 +116,12 @@ class UserProfileHandlerTest(AsyncHTTPTestCase):
         response = self.fetch('/userprofile')
         assert response.code == 200
 
-    # TODO: can't get this test to run due to handler setup?
-    # @pytest.mark.usefixtures("mock_authentication_none")
-    # def test_unauthenticated(self) -> None:
-    #     """Test 403 HTTP response (unauthenticated)."""
-    #     response = self.fetch('/userprofile')
-    #     assert response.code == 403
-    #     # assert response.reason == 'Forbidden'
+    @pytest.mark.usefixtures("mock_authentication_none")
+    def test_unauthenticated(self) -> None:
+        """Test login URL redirect (unauthenticated)."""
+        response = self.fetch('/userprofile')
+        assert response.code == 200
+        assert response.effective_url.index('/hub/api/oauth2/authorize') > 0
 
     @pytest.mark.usefixtures("mock_authentication_yossarian")
     def test_unauthorised(self):

cylc/uiserver/tests/test_handlers.py Show resolved Hide resolved
cylc/uiserver/handlers.py Show resolved Hide resolved
cylc/uiserver/handlers.py Show resolved Hide resolved
@kinow
Copy link
Member

kinow commented Apr 15, 2021

(We can change the test in a follow-up, only posted here because I had it in GitHub notifications and decided to look why these tests were failing 😅 )

Copy link
Member

@hjoliver hjoliver left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Tested as working 👍

@hjoliver
Copy link
Member

@oliver-sanders - leaving it to you to merge now or deal with @kinow's comments first.

@oliver-sanders
Copy link
Member Author

Merging with four approvals.

@oliver-sanders oliver-sanders merged commit caa2ce3 into cylc:master Apr 16, 2021
@oliver-sanders oliver-sanders deleted the auth branch April 16, 2021 10:21
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

tests: test authentication failure for all handlers
6 participants