[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [libvirt] [PATCH] secret: Add check/validation for correct usage when LookupByUUID



On 12/12/18 3:36 PM, John Ferlan wrote:
> 
> 
> On 12/12/18 9:29 AM, Michal Privoznik wrote:
>> On 12/4/18 9:32 PM, John Ferlan wrote:
>>> If virSecretGetSecretString is using by secretLookupByUUID,
>>> then it's possible the found sec->usageType doesn't match the
>>> desired @secretUsageType. If this occurs for the encrypted
>>> volume creation processing and a subsequent pool refresh is
>>> executed, then the secret used to create the volume will not
>>> be found by the storageBackendLoadDefaultSecrets which expects
>>> to find secrets by VIR_SECRET_USAGE_TYPE_VOLUME.
>>>
>>> Add a check to virSecretGetSecretString to avoid the possibility
>>> along with an error indicating the incorrect matched types.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: John Ferlan <jferlan redhat com>
>>> ---
>>>
>>>  If someone has an idea regarding how the usage could be filled
>>>  in "properly" for the qemuxml2argvtest, I'm willing to give it
>>>  a shot. However, fair warning trying to "mock" for tls, volume,
>>>  iscsi, and ceph could be rather painful. Thus the NONE was the
>>>  well, easiest way to go since the stored secret (ahem) shouldn't
>>>  be of usageType "none" (famous last words).
>>>
>>>  src/secret/secret_util.c | 17 +++++++++++++++++
>>>  tests/qemuxml2argvtest.c |  4 +++-
>>>  2 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/src/secret/secret_util.c b/src/secret/secret_util.c
>>> index 16e43ab2cc..27e164a425 100644
>>> --- a/src/secret/secret_util.c
>>> +++ b/src/secret/secret_util.c
>>> @@ -71,6 +71,23 @@ virSecretGetSecretString(virConnectPtr conn,
>>>      if (!sec)
>>>          goto cleanup;
>>>  
>>> +    /* NB: NONE is a byproduct of the qemuxml2argvtest test mocking
>>> +     * for UUID lookups. Normal secret XML processing would fail if
>>> +     * the usage type was NONE and since we have no way to set the
>>> +     * expected usage in that environment, let's just accept NONE */
>>> +    if (sec->usageType != VIR_SECRET_USAGE_TYPE_NONE &&
>>> +        sec->usageType != secretUsageType) {
>>> +        char uuidstr[VIR_UUID_STRING_BUFLEN];
>>> +
>>> +        virUUIDFormat(seclookupdef->u.uuid, uuidstr);
>>> +        virReportError(VIR_ERR_INVALID_ARG,
>>> +                       _("secret with uuid %s is of type '%s' not "
>>> +                         "expected '%s' type"),
>>> +                       uuidstr, virSecretUsageTypeToString(sec->usageType),
>>> +                       virSecretUsageTypeToString(secretUsageType));
>>> +        goto cleanup;
>>> +    }
>>
>> I don't quite understand why this is needed. I mean, if
>> seclookupdef->type == VIR_SECRET_LOOKUP_TYPE_USAGE then this check is
>> done while looking the secret up. If seclookupdef->type ==
>> VIR_SECRET_LOOKUP_TYPE_UUID then this check feels odd; the caller wants
>> the secret by UUID and they don't care about the usage type.
>>
>> Is there an actual error you're seeing?
>>
>> Michal
>>
> 
> Someone used an "iscsi" usage type secret by to create their luks
> encrypted volume. When using vol-dumpxml after creation the secret by
> usage existed. Then a pool-refresh caused the secret to disappear
> because on pool refresh the secret for a volume is refreshed by "volume"
> secret usage type.  When I posted this patch, the bz didn't exist, but
> it does now, see: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1656255

Okay, this prevents users from defining a volume with mismatching secret
usage type. But I think the problem is also elsewhere - in the bug,
after the pool is refreshed the secret is lost from the volume XML and
therefore vol-create-from looks up multiple secrets and is confused.

Michal


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]