vincbeck opened a new pull request, #54197: URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/54197
Resolves #53936. Follow-up of [this comment](https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/53936#issuecomment-3145637598). ## Description For every list Dag or sub Dag entity (e.g. task instance, dag run, ...), the current authorization is a bit messy in `FabAuthManager`. Since a user can have access to specifics Dags (and not all of them), when the user lists Dags, Airflow uses `get_authorized_dag_ids` from auth manager to figure whether the user has access to at least one Dag. If the user has access to at least one Dag then the access is granted to the API, if not the access is denied. If the access is granted, then the implementation of the API itself uses again `get_authorized_dag_ids` to retrieve the list of Dags to return to the user. I do think we should not check whether the user is authorized to list dags because the API returns only the dags the user has access to anyway. The consequence would is, instead of having a 403, the user would get an empty list of DAGs. In a fined grained access context, it makes more sense. Let's say I am user who has access to the Dag `test` only but this Dag does not exist (or has been removed) in the Airflow environment. In the current implementation, if I list Dags, I'll get a 403, but does it make sense? I have permissions to access Dags, I just happen to not have access to Dags existing in the environment. @pierrejeambrun also brought it up in [his comment](https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/53936#issuecomment-3150503079) that with the introduction of filters, having this logic on the API level does not make sense. ## Testing I tried to test it as much as I could but please test it on your end as well since this PR is quite impactful. ## Future Dags is the only resource type having fine grained access (authorizing a user having access to one specific Dag) in Airflow because it has been historically like this in `FabAuthManager`. But technically, nothing prevent us today, through `KeycloakAuthManager` for instance, to give permissions to users to say, one specific connection. Everything would work but the list API, you would get a 403. I am planning to add such capability across auth managers to other resources in the near future. <!-- Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one or more contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file distributed with this work for additional information regarding copyright ownership. The ASF licenses this file to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied. See the License for the specific language governing permissions and limitations under the License. --> <!-- Thank you for contributing! Please make sure that your code changes are covered with tests. And in case of new features or big changes remember to adjust the documentation. Feel free to ping committers for the review! In case of an existing issue, reference it using one of the following: closes: #ISSUE related: #ISSUE How to write a good git commit message: http://chris.beams.io/posts/git-commit/ --> <!-- Please keep an empty line above the dashes. --> --- **^ Add meaningful description above** Read the **[Pull Request Guidelines](https://github.com/apache/airflow/blob/main/contributing-docs/05_pull_requests.rst#pull-request-guidelines)** for more information. In case of fundamental code changes, an Airflow Improvement Proposal ([AIP](https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/Airflow+Improvement+Proposals)) is needed. In case of a new dependency, check compliance with the [ASF 3rd Party License Policy](https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-x). In case of backwards incompatible changes please leave a note in a newsfragment file, named `{pr_number}.significant.rst` or `{issue_number}.significant.rst`, in [airflow-core/newsfragments](https://github.com/apache/airflow/tree/main/airflow-core/newsfragments). -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
