On 06/13/2016 08:59 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 13.6.2016 08:38, Fraser Tweedale wrote:
On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 12:48:00AM +1000, Fraser Tweedale wrote:
On Thu, Jun 09, 2016 at 12:36:35PM +0200, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 9.6.2016 11:10, Fraser Tweedale wrote:
On Thu, Jun 09, 2016 at 10:12:40AM +0200, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 9.6.2016 08:44, Fraser Tweedale wrote:
On Thu, Jun 09, 2016 at 01:21:29AM +1000, Fraser Tweedale wrote:
On Wed, Jun 08, 2016 at 01:00:36PM +0200, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 8.6.2016 05:15, Fraser Tweedale wrote:
On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 03:42:22PM +1000, Fraser Tweedale wrote:
On Wed, Jun 01, 2016 at 02:51:04PM +1000, Fraser Tweedale wrote:
Hi team,
This patchset implements the 'ca' plugin for creating and
managing
lightweight sub-CAs, and updates the 'caacl' plugin and
'cert-request' command to support multiple CAs.
A brief overview of the patches:
0059
'ca' plugin, associated schema changes and container objects,
Dogtag REST API wrapper
0060
Add CA entry for the IPA CA on install/upgrade
0061
Update 'caacl' plugin with CA support (including enforcement)
0062
Update ra.request_certificate() to support specifying
target CA
0063
Add '--ca' option to 'cert-request' command
0064
Add '--issuer' option to 'cert-find' command
These patches depend on other pending patches:
0051, 0052, 0053, 0054, 0055, 0056
Signing key replication depends on unmerged Dogtag patches.
Builds
of Dogtag with the required patches, and of FreeIPA with all
completed sub-CAs work, should be available from my COPR soon:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/ftweedal/freeipa/
Some parts of the design are not implemented in the current
patchset, including:
- local parent CA (ipaca object) references
- sub-CA certificate renewal
- 'cert-show' command '--ca=NAME' option
- certmonger support for specifying CA
- revocation of deleted CAs
I look forward to your reviews!
Thanks,
Fraser
Rebased and updated patches attached.
Substantive changes:
- add required attributes for issuer DN and subject DN
- prevent rename of IPA CA
- when adding IPA CA entry, contact Dogtag to learn authority
id,
issuer DN and subject DN
- add 'read_ca' method to Dogtag interface
- tighten ACIs to prevent modification of ipacaid attribute
Updated patch 0064-3; adds --issuer option to cert-show and --ca
option to cert-show and cert-find.
Patch 0059:
1) On upgrade, why is the lightweight CA container created
twice - once in
41-subca.update, once using ensure_entry() call? It should be
done only
once.
I'll remove 41-subca.update; the routine in cainstance is the one
that's needed.
2) In ca_del, every CA specified in args[0] should be deleted,
not just the
first one.
3) Do not use NonFatalError, issue a warning instead:
self.add_message(MyNewWarningClass(name=...))
4) Can it actually happen that ca_show does not return ipacaid?
I guess not,
so you should be able to remove the check altogether and don't
bother with
the warning.
ipacaid is mandatory now, so I'll remove the check.
Patch 0060-0062: LGTM
Yippee \o/
Patch 0063:
Could you please define the CA param as follows:
Str('cacn?',
cli_name='ca',
query=True,
label=_("CA"),
doc=_("CA to use"),
),
?
This is for consitency with framework-generated parent key
params, which
unfortunately we cannot leverage in cert_request currently.
No problemo.
Patch 0064:
1) See my comment for patch 0063, it applies here as well.
2) The --issuer option should not be included in cert_show -
show commands
are supposed to retrieve an object given primary key(s), and
the primary key
of CA objects is just their cn.
The --issuer argument is because primary key for a cert is really
(issuer, serial). So it show the cert _with_ that issuer (and
serial), not the cert _for_ that issuer.
Correct, but in IPA the issuer is represented by the CA object, so
in IPA
the primary key for a certificate is actually (CA name, serial).
Certificate lookup by issuer name and serial is actually a search
operation,
analogical to how CA lookup by subject name is also a search
operation, so
it should be done by cert-find.
OK, I will remove the --issuer option for cert-find.
3) In find commands, the options form a filter, so instead of
raising
MutuallyExclusiveError in cert-find, return an empty result, as
with any
other unmatched filter.
Here, --issuer and --ca are two different ways to specify the
issuer. --issuer lets you give the issuer DN straight up; --ca
takes the name of an IPA CA object and looks up its issuer DN.
(Thus it makes no sense to give both options at once).
That's one way to look at it, but it's true only if you assume that
cert-find can only search certificates in Dogtag. This will very
soon became
untrue, as we will allow cert-find to also search certificates
anywhere in
LDAP (the server part of ticket #5381). There, the difference
between the
options would be that with --ca you search for certificates issued
by the
specified managed CA, but with --issuer you search for
certificates with the
given issuer name, be it managed CA or not.
--ca is just a "shorthand" for --issuer - it merely looks up subject
DN of the specified CA, and uses that as the issuer option.
For now, IMO the correct behavior should be that if both are
specified and
the issuer name of the specified CA does not match the specified
issuer
name, empty result is returned, otherwise carry on with the search in
Dogtag.
If I allow both, the behaviour will then be:
specify issuer DN only)
search using given issuer DN
specify CA only)
search using subject DN of specified CA. If no such CA, error.
specify issuer DN and CA)
search using given issuer DN, and ensure that result (if any)
matches subject DN of specified CA. If no such CA, error.
I'm happy to implement this if you confirm that you think it's the
correct behaviour.
Looks correct to me.
Thanks; updated patches attached. Martin, this patch should also
fix the upgrade issue.
Cheers,
Fraser
Another rebase to fix conflicts in VERSION file. No other changes.
Thanks.
The remaining cert commands (status, revoke, remove-hold) should also
have the cacn option consistent with cert-show. This can be added in
further patch, though.
I think it would make sense if the cn argument in ca commands was
optional, with the default being 'ipa'. This can also be done later.
So LGTM. If Martin agrees, we can push this patch set.
Hi Fraser,
during functional review I found the following issues:
1.)
If I create a CAACL rule tied to a specific sub-CA let's say for user
certificate issuance:
"""
ipa caacl-show user_cert_issuance
Enabled: TRUE
User category: all
CAs: user_sub_ca
Profiles: caIPAuserCert
ACL name: user_cert_issuance
"""
I can still happily request certificate for a user using root-CA:
"""
ipa cert-request cert.csr --principal jdoe --ca ipa
Certificate: MIID9j.../Ov8mkjFA==
Subject: CN=jdoe,O=IPA.TEST
Issuer: CN=Certificate Authority,O=IPA.TEST
...
"""
should not this be denied by CA-ACL rule?
The default IPA CAACL rule is like this:
"""
ipa caacl-show hosts_services_caIPAserviceCert
Enabled: TRUE
Host category: all
Service category: all
Profiles: caIPAserviceCert
ACL name: hosts_services_caIPAserviceCert
"""
so the default rule should not allow users to request certs at all.
2.)
The '--chain' option in cert-show/cert-request is not implemented, but
this was probably a deliberate decision. We should however at least open
a ticket about this and add it later.
3.)
I cannot issue a user certificate on a replica with configured CA:
"""
[root@replica1 ~]# ipa cert-request cert.csr --ca user_sub_ca
--principal jrogan
ipa: ERROR: Certificate operation cannot be completed: FAILURE (CA not
found: bc953851-1f24-4e16-9847-9ee5bbe6dd0e)
[root@replica1 ~]# ipa ca-find user_sub_ca
------------
1 CA matched
------------
Name: user_sub_ca
Description: CA for issuing user certificates
Authority ID: bc953851-1f24-4e16-9847-9ee5bbe6dd0e
Subject DN: CN=User Cert Sub-CA,O=IPA.TEST
Issuer DN: CN=Certificate Authority,O=IPA.TEST
----------------------------
Number of entries returned 1
----------------------------
[root@replica1 ~]# ipa cert-request cert.csr --ca user_sub_ca
--principal jrogan
ipa: ERROR: Certificate operation cannot be completed: FAILURE (CA not
found: bc953851-1f24-4e16-9847-9ee5bbe6dd0e)
"""
The LDAP entry is there, but it seems like the sub-CA was not replicated
at the dogtag backend. This occurs regardless of whether the master was
freshly installed or upgraded from 4.3.1 release.
--
Martin^3 Babinsky
--
Manage your subscription for the Freeipa-devel mailing list:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/freeipa-devel
Contribute to FreeIPA: http://www.freeipa.org/page/Contribute/Code
