-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/73212/#review222812
-----------------------------------------------------------




agents-common/src/main/resources/service-defs/ranger-servicedef-atlas.json
Line 100 (original), 100 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/73212/#comment311992>

    Following accessTypes are not applicable to 'entity' resource anymore; they 
are only applicable to the new resource 'classification'. Please remove them 
from here.
     - entity-add-classification
     - entity-update-classification
     - entity-remove-classification



security-admin/src/main/java/org/apache/ranger/patch/PatchAtlasForClassificationResource_J10047.java
Lines 217 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/73212/#comment311993>

    Only policies having following resource hierarchy need to be looked into:
     - entity-type/entity-classification/entity
    
    Other policies can be skipped. Consider adding a check here.



security-admin/src/main/java/org/apache/ranger/patch/PatchAtlasForClassificationResource_J10047.java
Lines 225 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/73212/#comment311994>

    This is a smart approach to clone the policy - good work! Please consider 
following updates:
     - policy.getName() + CLASSIFICATION: introduce a hypen as separator for 
easier readability
        policy.getName() + " - " + CLASSIFICATION
     - set following policy fields to null:
       - id, guid, version, createTime, updateTime, resourceSignature
     - is resourceSignature computation (#234, #235) needed here? Doesn't 
svcStore.createPolicy() handle this?


- Madhan Neethiraj


On April 4, 2021, 5:39 p.m., Nixon Rodrigues wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/73212/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated April 4, 2021, 5:39 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for ranger, Jayendra Parab, Madhan Neethiraj, Ramesh Mani, 
> Sarath Subramanian, and Velmurugan Periasamy.
> 
> 
> Bugs: RANGER-3195
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RANGER-3195
> 
> 
> Repository: ranger
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Requirement :- The new requirement is to provide a way to authorize who can 
> Add/Remove/Update Classification for an entity even if the entities on which 
> classification have to be applied do not have classifications already tagged 
> to it.
> 
> Solution:-
> 
> 
>  This will require changes on Ranger Atlas service defination to introduce a 
> new resource "*classifications*" in entity authz model called classifications 
> at level 40 [4th level], with the new classifications resource ranger 
> authorizer will check the classification exist in policy for that 
> add/update/remove classification request to authorize.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   agents-common/src/main/resources/service-defs/ranger-servicedef-atlas.json 
> 4ce7ec991 
>   
> plugin-atlas/src/main/java/org/apache/ranger/authorization/atlas/authorizer/RangerAtlasAuthorizer.java
>  79ef60465 
>   
> plugin-atlas/src/main/java/org/apache/ranger/services/atlas/RangerServiceAtlas.java
>  c13633ad2 
>   security-admin/db/mysql/optimized/current/ranger_core_db_mysql.sql 
> 7179dc998 
>   security-admin/db/oracle/optimized/current/ranger_core_db_oracle.sql 
> 40917cdf4 
>   security-admin/db/postgres/optimized/current/ranger_core_db_postgres.sql 
> ba9eb0157 
>   
> security-admin/db/sqlanywhere/optimized/current/ranger_core_db_sqlanywhere.sql
>  371846f1e 
>   security-admin/db/sqlserver/optimized/current/ranger_core_db_sqlserver.sql 
> 90004ec77 
>   
> security-admin/src/main/java/org/apache/ranger/patch/PatchAtlasForClassificationResource_J10047.java
>  PRE-CREATION 
> 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/73212/diff/5/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Tested Atlas with Ranger authorization with entities for add, update , 
> add-classification, remove-classification, update-classification events.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Nixon Rodrigues
> 
>

Reply via email to