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

File auth backend should not be in cleartext #139

Open
ewolinetz opened this issue Jun 26, 2018 · 3 comments
Open

File auth backend should not be in cleartext #139

ewolinetz opened this issue Jun 26, 2018 · 3 comments

Comments

@ewolinetz
Copy link
Contributor

Currently, file auth uses base64 encoded files. We should be able to encrypt these files instead of using clear text.

@jcantrill
Copy link
Collaborator

Can you be more specific where the encryption is needed. I believe its pretty standard for the username/password to be received as base64 encoded. Additionally, I would expect the file to be mounted as a secret which is already base64 encoded and behind other Openshift security measures. Is there a usercase we are missing to address a customer or security need?

@richm
Copy link
Contributor

richm commented Jun 27, 2018

I guess I'm wondering why we need this password backend at all. We should either use the searchguard password auth backend, or do the auth in the oauth-proxy.
Passwords are typically stored as base64 encoded hashes e.g. sha512, then base64 encode the sha512 value. A base64 encoded password is virtually cleartext.

@jcantrill
Copy link
Collaborator

This backend only exists because the default SG version is unable to handle Openshift service accounts which are in the form of system:serviceaccount:namespace:name or something to that effect. Requests are generally encoded with the username/password as 'username:password'. The default implementation splits on the first ':' which does not work for service accounts

This only exists for metrics because the oauth-proxy did not pass bearer token; I believe it has since been modified to do just that which would allow the SA used to the proxy to make it all the way through to ES.

I would suggest that we probably would be better spending our efforts making an acutal oauth backend which could resolve some of the hackyness that exists now and/or fix the metrics parts to rely on the SA

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants