Yes, this is out of upstream, based on downstream choices we made five
years ago.

This behavior is not considered a bug.  When anonymous authentication is
enabled, you will only get a 401 if presenting an invalid token or expired
certificate.  When connecting anonymously, your connection successfully
authenticated, it is not a 401 condition.  Your successfully authenticated
connection (successful as anonymous), attempted to access a resource which
it did not have access to, it is forbidden, getting a 403.

On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 11:18 AM Ben Parees <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 10:52 AM David Eads <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> There is no plan to switch to 401.
>>
>
> Would plans be created if a BZ were opened?  Or this is an outright
> rejection of ever changing it because it's not deemed incorrect (or because
> "it's an api now and we can't change it")
>
> (Also i assume this is coming out of upstream?)
>
>
>
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 10:44 AM Jean-Francois Maury <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> According to the spec, it's wrong to return 403 in this case. Please re
>>> read my wording from the spec.
>>> Should I understand that there is no plan at all to switch to 401 ?
>>>
>>> Jeff
>>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 3:46 PM David Eads <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The 403 is intentional.  The user has been authenticated as anonymous,
>>>> so a 401 isn't returned.  Kubernetes and OpenShift both return 403 when a
>>>> user (even anonymous) attempts to access a forbidden resource regardless of
>>>> whether it even exists.
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 4:06 PM Jean-Francois Maury <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> We are trying to adapt our library but found the following problem:
>>>>> when we issue a call to /apis or some of the discovery endpoint without
>>>>> authentication info; OCP returns 403 instead of 401.
>>>>> According to the HTTP spec,403 should not be repeated and
>>>>> authentication will not help (see
>>>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2616#section-10.4.4)
>>>>>
>>>>> So is it on purpose or is this going to be fixed ?
>>>>>
>>>>> Jeff
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 5:56 PM Andre Dietisheim <[email protected]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Akram
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for the answer. Insightful.
>>>>>> For now we can't easily switch libraries given the extent of usage
>>>>>> and amount of work to migrate.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>> André
>>>>>> Am 01.10.19 um 16:34 schrieb Akram Ben Aissi:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi André,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> indeed this is the new default. And, historically, because of a CVE
>>>>>> raising an issue about it, dropping discovery of /api has been removed 
>>>>>> but
>>>>>> then temporary restored in 4.1 and removed in 4.2.
>>>>>> See this https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1711533
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On the Jenkins plugins we were about to fix similar issues, cause
>>>>>> /oapi was deprecated in OCP 4.2 . We depends on kubernetes-client Java
>>>>>> library which fixed this.
>>>>>> https://github.com/fabric8io/kubernetes-client/issues/1587 and
>>>>>> follow the different PR. If you depend on this library also, maybe you 
>>>>>> have
>>>>>> your fix in a recent version.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Otherwise, IIRC, the eclipse plugin required credentials (or a token)
>>>>>> to connect to openshift server, so in your case, you maybe "just" need to
>>>>>> use them to then get the endpoints.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Akram
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Le mar. 1 oct. 2019 à 15:38, Andre Dietisheim <[email protected]>
>>>>>> a écrit :
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In OpenShift 4.2 "/apis" started only being accessible to authorized
>>>>>>> users. This causes troubles for the Eclipse tooling and the java
>>>>>>> client
>>>>>>> library openshift-restclient-java
>>>>>>> (https://github.com/openshift/openshift-restclient-java) which
>>>>>>> tries to
>>>>>>> discover endpoints before authenticating.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thus my question(s):
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> * Is this the new default?
>>>>>>> * if this restriction is deliberate, what's the reasoning behind it?
>>>>>>> * Is there a workaround?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks for your answers!
>>>>>>> André
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> dev mailing list
>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>> http://lists.openshift.redhat.com/openshiftmm/listinfo/dev
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> dev mailing list
>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>> http://lists.openshift.redhat.com/openshiftmm/listinfo/dev
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>>
>>>>> Jeff Maury
>>>>>
>>>>> Manager, DevTools
>>>>>
>>>>> Red Hat EMEA <https://www.redhat.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> @RedHat <https://twitter.com/redhat>   Red Hat
>>>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/red-hat>  Red Hat
>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/RedHatInc>
>>>>> <https://www.redhat.com>
>>>>> <https://redhat.com/summit>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> dev mailing list
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> http://lists.openshift.redhat.com/openshiftmm/listinfo/dev
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Jeff Maury
>>>
>>> Manager, DevTools
>>>
>>> Red Hat EMEA <https://www.redhat.com>
>>>
>>> [email protected]
>>> @RedHat <https://twitter.com/redhat>   Red Hat
>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/red-hat>  Red Hat
>>> <https://www.facebook.com/RedHatInc>
>>> <https://www.redhat.com>
>>> <https://redhat.com/summit>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> dev mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://lists.openshift.redhat.com/openshiftmm/listinfo/dev
>>
>
>
> --
> Ben Parees | OpenShift
>
>
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openshift.redhat.com/openshiftmm/listinfo/dev

Reply via email to