@Ludwig Krispenz <mailto:lkrispen@redhat.com> The script i
have
attached in my previous mail was ported from the TET script .
Now i am attaching the main bash script , please check it out.
I'll do it once
again, but William and I had asked several times for a
doc describing what you want to achieve with these tests, not throwing
other versions of the script and let us figure out what it is meaning.
Now from the bash script it looks like this is not for rolebased acees
but for virtual attributes taken into account when selecting the target.
To check if this is a correct port we would need the contents of the
acivattr.ldif
On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 1:48 PM Ludwig <lkrispen(a)redhat.com
<mailto:lkrispen@redhat.com>> wrote:
On 01/22/2019 08:57 AM, Anuj Borah wrote:
> @Ludwig Krispenz <mailto:lkrispen@redhat.com> , exactly, Please
> check attached script , how it is implemented .
>
> Filter role and aci combination .
But this is not testing role based acis,
your bind rule always is userdn=...., and you are using the roles
attr in targeting entries. See the admin guide for acis:
https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_directory_server/10...
so what you need is an aci with
allow (search, read) roledn="ldap:///cn=<your role
definition>,dc=example,dc=com"
then you need an filterdrole entry :
cn=<your role definition>,dc=example,dc=com
nsrolefilter: <some filter>
then you need users matching this filter and users not matching
that filter, and check the results of an ldap operation.
Please follow the request and do a writeup of what you want to
achieve, before providing new code.
Ludwig
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 1:13 PM Ludwig <lkrispen(a)redhat.com
> <mailto:lkrispen@redhat.com>> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 01/21/2019 11:01 PM, William Brown wrote:
> >
> >> On 21 Jan 2019, at 17:08, Anuj Borah <aborah(a)redhat.com
> <mailto:aborah@redhat.com>> wrote:
> >>
> >> One small correction here :
> >>
> >> using newly created nsUserAccountRole and
> nsUserAccountRoles ( Will be used only to create filter role
> ) , i am creating filter roles only . This is the confusion
> here , we should remember filter roles are nothing but
> entries with o='something'. I am not touching any user here ,
> but i am creating roles and these roles are covering the
> users automatically a Ludwig Krispenzs said earlier. example-
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
role=nsUserAccountRole(topo.standalone,'cn=tuser1,ou=People,dc=example,dc=com')
> >> user_props={'cn':'Anuj',
'nsRoleFilter':'cn=*'}
> >> role.create(properties=user_props, basedn=SUFFIX)
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> In above example just created one filer role which will
> cover all users having 'cn=*' in 'ou=People'. Here
> 'cn=tuser1,ou=People,dc=example,dc=com' is nothing but a
> filter role which will cover all users having 'cn=*' in
> 'ou=People'.
> >>
> >> Another example as given bellow:
> >>
> >> dn: cn=FILTERROLEENGROLE,o=acivattr1,dc=example,dc=com
> >> cn: FILTERROLEENGROLE
> >> nsRoleFilter: cn=*
> >> objectClass: top
> >> objectClass: LDAPsubentry
> >> objectClass: nsRoleDefinition
> >> objectClass: nsComplexRoleDefinition
> >> objectClass: nsFilteredRoleDefinition
> >>
> >> This above entry is nothing but filter role entry , which
> will cover all users in 'o=acivattr1' which has sub entries
> that begins with 'cn'. And this is the property of filter role .
> >>
> >> Yes , i must say that newly created nsUserAccountRole and
> nsUserAccountRoles which i renamed to nsFilterAccountRole
> and nsFilterAccountRoles will only cover filter role as you
> cant create Filter role and other roles like Manage role all
> together . For my porting stuff newly created
> nsFilterAccountRole and nsFilterAccountRoles is more than
> enough because i need filter roles only .
> >>
> >> Hope it clears all of your doubts.
> >>
> > So I think the idea of composing this with
> nsUsers/nsAccount is so that the nsRoleFilter becomes:
> >
> > &(objectClass=account)(cn=*)
> but this filter would probably match all accounts, to
> properly test role
> based acis you need to have a set of user matching the filter
> and get
> access granted and a set of user not matching the filter and
> access
> rejected.
> >
> > This way it’s limited to just those types. Else we would
> have just “nsFilteredRole” lib389 type (which could be
> simpler, given that this idea seems to have caused so much
> confusion already … :( )
> >
> > I still think it would be good to see a write of “how it
> works” by hand, where you make the role, add the filter, show
> the roles on the users, then how that translates to the lib389.
> +1
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> >
> > —
> > Sincerely,
> >
> > William Brown
> > Software Engineer, 389 Directory Server
> > SUSE Labs
> > _______________________________________________
> > 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> <mailto:389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org>
> > To unsubscribe send an email to
> 389-devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> <mailto:389-devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org>
> > Fedora Code of Conduct:
>
https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
> > List Guidelines:
>
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> > List Archives:
>
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-devel@lists.fedoraproje...
> _______________________________________________
> 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> <mailto:389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org>
> To unsubscribe send an email to
> 389-devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> <mailto:389-devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org>
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
>
https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
> List Guidelines:
>
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
>
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-devel@lists.fedoraproje...
>