-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 349
SAML 4.3.0 addition persmission #2987
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
Changes from all commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -60,7 +60,6 @@ grant { | |
| permission java.security.SecurityPermission "putProviderProperty.BC"; | ||
| permission java.security.SecurityPermission "insertProvider.BC"; | ||
| permission java.security.SecurityPermission "removeProviderProperty.BC"; | ||
| permission java.util.PropertyPermission "jdk.tls.rejectClientInitiatedRenegotiation", "write"; | ||
|
|
||
| permission java.lang.RuntimePermission "accessUserInformation"; | ||
|
|
||
|
|
@@ -74,6 +73,10 @@ grant { | |
|
|
||
| //Enable this permission to debug unauthorized de-serialization attempt | ||
| //permission java.io.SerializablePermission "enableSubstitution"; | ||
|
|
||
| //SAML policy | ||
| permission java.util.PropertyPermission "*", "read,write"; | ||
| permission org.opensearch.secure_sm.ThreadPermission "modifyArbitraryThread"; | ||
|
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Why is this one?
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Should be sufficient
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Testing this out to confirm
Collaborator
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Created an issue for investigation #2989
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. @reta That permission did not work for me testing this locally.
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I also tried with but that also doesn't work
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks @cwperks could we have a test for it that manifests the issue? Could you please share stack traces as well?
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. We think we identified the problem with @willyborankin , that is related to
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. The full stack trace is:
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I am manually running the frontend tests in |
||
| }; | ||
|
|
||
| grant codeBase "${codebase.netty-common}" { | ||
|
|
||
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hm ... could we enumerate the properties that needs to be accessed instead? And why the
writeis needed?Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
mmm no. It is up to the library which permissions it wants to use and how AFAIU :-( this permission is about access to OpenSAML XML mapping objects... I took a look in the code of OpenSAML so I do not think that this is critical.