Vamsi-klu commented on code in PR #18975:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pinot/pull/18975#discussion_r3817444507
##########
pinot-controller/src/main/java/org/apache/pinot/controller/api/access/AuthenticationFilter.java:
##########
@@ -130,35 +142,70 @@ AccessType extractAccessType(Method endpointMethod) {
return AccessType.READ;
}
+ /// Resolves the table `endpointMethod` acts on, or `null` when the request
addresses the cluster rather than a
+ /// table. `AccessControlUtils.validatePermission` picks the table-scoped or
the cluster-wide check on that answer,
+ /// so it must not be steerable by the caller.
+ ///
+ /// Path parameters are template variables of the endpoint's own `@Path`,
hence part of its declaration. Query
+ /// parameters are caller-supplied and JAX-RS surfaces every one present on
the URI, so only those the endpoint
+ /// declares may name the table: otherwise a caller could append
`?tableName=<a table it is scoped to>` to a cluster
+ /// endpoint and have it authorized as a table-scoped request.
+ @Nullable
@VisibleForTesting
static String extractTableName(Method endpointMethod, MultivaluedMap<String,
String> pathParameters,
MultivaluedMap<String, String> queryParameters) {
Authorize authorize = endpointMethod.getAnnotation(Authorize.class);
if (authorize != null && authorize.targetType() == TargetType.TABLE) {
- return FineGrainedAuthUtils.findRawTargetId(authorize, pathParameters,
queryParameters);
+ // The annotation names the parameter, but it is only trustworthy where
the endpoint also binds it.
+ MultivaluedMap<String, String> trustedQueryParameters =
+ declaredQueryParams(endpointMethod).contains(authorize.paramName())
? queryParameters
+ : new MultivaluedHashMap<>();
+ return FineGrainedAuthUtils.findRawTargetId(authorize, pathParameters,
trustedQueryParameters);
Review Comment:
That was the real leftover. I moved the declared-query-param lookup into
FineGrainedAuthUtils and threaded it through findRawTargetId.
validateFineGrainedAuth and the coarse filter now use the same primitive, so a
custom FineGrainedAccessControl cannot see a targetId the coarse check already
treated as cluster-wide. Added a test that an undeclared ?tableName= no longer
reaches hasAccess.
--
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]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
