Hi @All, for me, that uses Drill with a kerberized hadoop cluster and Ranger as central Access-Control-System i would love to have an Ranger-Plugin for Drill, but i would assume a lot Drill users just spins up a cluster in front of S3 or azure.
So why not using a generic approach with GRANT and REVOKE for users and groups on specific workspaces, or at least storage plugins? With that an admin can control which users and groups can access all storage plugins we have, no matter if the underneath plugin has such a system. Maybe we could use the Metastore to store such information? Regards, Christian ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Paul Rogers <par0...@gmail.com> schrieb am Donnerstag, 13. Januar 2022 um 23:40: > Hey All, > > Other members of the Hadoop Ecosystem rely on external systems to handle > > permissions: Ranger or Sentry. There is probably something different in the > > AWS world. > > As you look into security, you'll see that you need to maintain permissions > > on many entities: files, connections, etc. You need different permissions: > > read, write, create, etc. In larger groups of people, you need roles: admin > > role, sales analyst role, production engineer role. Users map to roles, and > > roles take permissions. > > Creating this just for Drill is not effective: no one wants to learn a > > Drill "Security Store" any more than folks want to learn the "Drill > > metastore". Drill is seldom the only tool in a shop: people want to set > > permissions in one place, not in each tool. So, we should integrate with > > existing tools. > > Drill should provide an API, and be prepared to enforce rules. Drill > > defines the entities that can be secured, and the available permissions. > > Then, it is up to an external system to provide user identity, take tuples > > of (user, resource, permission) and return a boolean of whether that user > > is authorized or not. MapR, Pam, Hadoop and other systems would be > > implemented on top of the Drill permissions API, as would whatever need you > > happen to have. > > Thanks, > > - Paul > > On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 12:32 PM Curtis Lambert cur...@datadistillr.com > > wrote: > > > This is what we are handling with Vault outside of Drill, combined with > > > > aliasing. James is tracking some of what you've been finding with the > > > > credential store but even then we want the single source of auth. We can > > > > chat with James on the next Drill stand up (and anyone else who wants to > > > > feel the pain). > > > > [image: avatar] > > > > Curtis Lambert > > > > CTO > > > > Email: > > > > cur...@datadistillr.com cur...@datdistillr.com > > > > Phone: > > > > - 706-402-0249 > > > > [image: LinkedIn]LinkedIn > > > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/curtis-lambert-2009b2141/ [image: Calendly] > > > > Calendly https://calendly.com/curtis283/generic-zoom > > > > [image: Data Distillr logo] https://www.datadistillr.com/ > > > > On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 3:29 PM Charles Givre cgi...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > Hello all, > > > > > > One of the issues we've been dancing around is having per-user access > > > > > > controls in Drill. As Drill was originally built around the Hadoop > > > > > > ecosystem, the Hadoop based connections make use of user-impersonation > > > > > > for > > > > > > per user access controls. However, a rather glaring deficiency is the > > > > > > lack > > > > > > of per-user access controls for connections like JDBC, Mongo, Splunk etc. > > > > > > Recently when I was working on OAuth pull request, it occurred to me that > > > > > > we might be able to slightly extend the credential provider interface to > > > > > > allow for per-user credentials. Here's what I was thinking... > > > > > > A bit of background: The credential provider interface is really an > > > > > > abstraction for a HashMap. Here's my proposal.... The cred provider > > > > > > interface would store two hashmaps, one for per-user creds and one for > > > > > > global creds. When a user is authenticated to Drill, when they create a > > > > > > storage plugin connection, the credential provider would associate the > > > > > > creds with their Drill username. The storage plugins that use credential > > > > > > provider would thus get per-user credentials. > > > > > > If users did not want per-user credentials, they could simply use direct > > > > > > credentials OR use specify that in the credential provider classes. What > > > > > > do you think? > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > -- C
publickey - z0ltrix@pm.me - 0xF0E154C5.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
