CREATE QUEUE permission would apply whether the queue was created when a user logged in and used it, or if that user connected to the broker via JMX or QMF and used the management operations to create the queue.The plugins can return four different values - ALLOWED, DENIED, ABSTAIN and DEFER. Since we can have two plugins of the same type looking at a particular access request, one for the virtual host and the other for global, the reults ineract as follows:
Host |
Global |
Result |
|---|---|---|
ALLOWED |
any |
ALLOWED |
DENIED |
any |
DENIED |
ABSTAIN |
ALLOWED |
ALLOWED |
ABSTAIN |
DENIED |
DENIED |
ABSTAIN |
ABSTAIN |
ABSTAIN |
ABSTAIN |
DEFER |
global |
ABSTAIN |
none |
ABSTAIN |
DEFER |
ALLOWED |
ALLOWED |
DEFER |
DENIED |
DENIED |
DEFER |
ABSTAIN |
host |
DEFER |
DEFER |
global |
DEFER |
none |
host |
The host and global entries in the Result column indicate that the default answer for that plugin should be returned.
The access control file consists of a series of rules, describing the permissions granted to users or groups for operations on object types, with specific properties. these are all restricted to certain values, as illustrated by the following lists of tokens:
ALLOW, ALLOW_LOG, DENY, DENY_LOG
ALL, CONSUME, PUBLISH, CREATE, ACCESS, CONNECT, BIND, UNBIND, DELETE, PURGE, UPDATE, (ADMIN ?)
ALL, VIRTUALHOST, QUEUE, TOPIC, EXCHANGE, BROKER, LINK, ROUTE, METHOD, (USER, LOG, CONFIG ?)
ROUTING_KEY, NAME, QUEUE_NAME, OWNER, TYPE, ALTERNATE, INTERNAL, NO_WAIT, NO_LOCAL, NO_ACK, PASSIVE, DURABLE, EXCLUSIVE, TEMPORARY, AUTO_DELETE
The ObjectProperties are keys that are listed as key = value pairs after an Operation/ObjectType combination. They must be in this format; a lone string is not accepted here. This is to make the ACL entries less ambiguous.
The object types and operations are related, with only certain combinations allowed. The table below lists allowed combinations with y and possible combinations as ?. The rows contain ObjectTypes and the columns Operations.
|
CONSUME |
PUBLISH |
CREATE |
ACCESS |
BIND |
UNBIND |
DELETE |
PURGE |
UPDATE |
ADMIN |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
VIRTUALHOST |
|
|
|
y |
|
|
|
|
|
? |
QUEUE |
y |
y |
y |
|
|
|
y |
y |
|
|
TOPIC |
y |
y |
y |
|
|
|
y |
|
|
|
EXCHANGE |
|
|
y |
|
y |
y |
y |
|
|
|
BROKER |
|
|
|
y |
|
|
|
|
|
? |
LINK |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ROUTE |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
METHOD |
|
|
|
? |
|
|
|
|
? |
? |
USER |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
? |
? |
LOG |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
? |
CONFIG |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
? |
To access JMX/QMF attributes there are still some questions. The ADMIN operation could be used, with a set of object types describing the different broker-wide objects that can be manged, sich as LOG, USER and CONFIG. Alternatively, the METHOD object is currently used by the C++ broker ACL files. The type of operation is usually determined by the name of the method, with get*, is* and query* being read (as well as invoked JMX methods that have an impact of INFO) and set* being write, any other method would be usually an operation with side effects. These operations, if they are creating queues etc. can be permissioned using those ACLs. It is only actions that can only be performed through the admin interfaces that need special handling. The fact that the type of operation is defined by the method name makes these ACLs different from the others - it makes no sense to have both UPDATE and ACCESS, eg. adding UPDATE permission for a read method, or ACCESS permission for a write method or other operation.
For instance, to permission access using the METHOD object, I suggest
ACL ALLOW admin ACCESS METHOD name=get* ACL ALLOW adk ACCESS METHOD name=* ACL ALLOW other ACCESS METHOD name=createQueue |
I am, however, more in favour of abandoning the METHOD based mechanism, in favour of enumerating the objects that can be accessed via the management interfaces, such as QUEUE, USER etc. and adding ACCESS and UPDATE, possibly ADMIN/MANAGE operations to them where this is useful or possible.
These are true/false properties that can be specified to confgure the ACL mechanism further, and would be added to the start of an ACL file.
CREATE QUEUE is permissioned, appropriate ACCESS VIRTUALHOST and BIND EXCHANGE permissions would also be added.DENIED if true.ALLOWED if true.TOPIC if true.The declarations are as follows, using some kind of grammar, with + and * having the usual regular expression meanings, parenthesis denote grouping and brackets denote optional elements.
CONFIG ( <config-property> '=' <TRUE | FALSE> ) + GROUP <group-name> ( <username | group-name> ) + [ <number> ] ACL <permission> <username | group-name | ALL> <operation> [ <object-type> ( <property-name> '=' <property-value> ) * ] |
This allows a rather looser and more readable style for ACL files, while still retaining the ability to read the stricter files accepted by the C++ broker. Bear in mind that the group declarations are to be deprecated, in favour of an external directory service, using a plugin mechanism.
The initial <number> is used to allow rulesets to be created which allow indicidual rules to be enabled and disabled using an admin interface, and an ACL file using numbered lines would be restricted to having increasing numbers per rule, although gaps would be allowed to enable rules to be inserted later, again using an admin interface. This administrative interface would also allow saving of a modified ruleset and re-loading.
Allow "adk@iterator.co.uk" Create Queue \
Owner="adk@iterator.co.uk" Routingkey = "chocolate biscuits" \
QueueName="kitten.*"
|
# allow adk to create queues
Allow "adk@iterator.co.uk" Create Queue \
Owner = "adk@iterator.co.uk" \
Routingkey = "chocolate biscuits" \
QueueName=kitten
|
# allow adk access to this virtual host
110 ALLOW "adk@iterator" ACCESS VIRTUALHOST
# allow creating temporary queues and queues with names matching adk.*
210 ALLOW-LOG \
"adk@iterator" BIND EXCHANGE \
routingKey="adk.*" \
name="amq.direct" # allow adk.* queue bind to amq.direct
220 \
ALLOW-LOG "adk@iterator" BIND EXCHANGE \
routingKey="tmp.*" name="amq.direct"
230 ALLOW "adk@iterator" CREATE QUEUE name="adk.*" owner="adk@iterator"
240 ALLOW "adk@iterator" CREATE QUEUE temporary="true" owner="adk@iterator"
# allow publish and consume of messages on the queues
310 ALLOW "adk@iterator" CONSUME QUEUE name="adk.*"
315 ALLOW "adk@iterator" PUBLISH QUEUE routingkey="adk.export#extra" // foo
320 ALLOW "adk@iterator" PUBLISH QUEUE name="adk.*"
# default deny
910 DENY ALL ALL ALL
|
== METHOD considered harmful ==
A lot of the object types and operations used in the ACL file are shared
between the Java and C++ brokers and are non-contentious, since they
represent actual objects that exist in AMQP - broker, queue, exchange
and so forth. What appears to be at issue is how to permission extra
funtionality in the broker, such as administration of user accounts or
logging levels The C++ broker's 'METHOD' object is one mechanism, and
results in ACL lines that specify a single method or set of methods that
can be executed, and does not convey whether these are reading, writing
or have other side effects on the broker. An example is shoen below:
ACL ALLOW adk UPDATE METHOD name=getLoggingLevel
ACL ALLOW adk UPDATE METHOD name=setLoggingLevel
ACL ALLOW adk UPDATE METHOD name=reloadLoggingConfig
This seems to be at the wrong level of abstraction. Looking at this
in a general fashion, there are three things we wish to do to objects:
get a property, set a property and execute an operation. These can be
mapped to READ, WRITE, EXECUTE or GET, SET, INVOKE, ACCESS, UPDATE,
ADMIN, and so on as operations. The next step would be to decide what
the object type is that is being manipulated. I would be happy for this
to be one of the existing AMQP objects, including BROKER, since this
follows the existing pattern of permissions. Another point to note is
that existing mechanisms such as JMX already have the conceptual split
into these three types of action.
If we abandon the METHOD object in favour of existing object types, we
still need to be able to permission such items as users and logging, and
I propose these are made part of the broker object, with the possibility
of adding other, vendor-specific extensions too. This would result in ACL
lines as shown below, which would grant permission to view attributes
of the logging subsystem, update those attributes and execute other
administrative actions. Finally, if there is a management schema change
and the names of methods used change, or new methods and attributes are
added, the ACL file does not have to be changed, since the permissions
relate to subsystems or extensions.
ACL ALLOW adk ACCESS BROKER extension=logging
ACL ALLOW adk UPDATE BROKER extension=logging
ACL ALLOW adk ADMIN BROKER extension=logging
or
ACL ALLOW adk ADMIN BROKER subsystem=acl
If we want to create an ACL file format that is usable across AMQP
brokers, then the use of 'extension=<name>' or 'subsystem=<name>' with
a set of pre-defined names, say 'logging', 'users', 'configuration',
and a naming convention to prevent clashes, such as 'x-<vendor>-*'
for vendor specific implementations or just 'x-*' for experimental
extensions/subsystems seems appropriate.