[Freeipa-devel] Final OTP Review

Martin Kosek mkosek at redhat.com
Fri May 17 07:42:13 UTC 2013

On 05/14/2013 07:12 PM, Martin Kosek wrote:
> On 05/14/2013 03:53 PM, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
>> On Fri, 2013-05-10 at 16:55 -0400, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2013-05-03 at 09:08 -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 2013-05-02 at 23:39 -0700, Nathan Kinder wrote:
>>>>> On 05/02/2013 10:27 PM, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
>>>>>> All issues fixed unless noted below... The attached patches are tested
>>>>>> to work.
>>>>>> On Thu, 2013-05-02 at 17:39 -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
>>>>>>> - (nit) slapi_ch_malloc/slapi_ch_strdup are not checked for failure
>>>>>>> (although I know slapi_ch_malloc() currently just aborts on failure, I
>>>>>>> think that is plain wrong which is why I would prefer using
>>>>>>> malloc/strdup, but well, I guess this is not something I am going to
>>>>>>> care too much about for now).
>>>>>> Not fixed.
>>>>>>> - Is the logic with auth_type_used correct ?
>>>>>>> At least the name of the variable sounds misleading, because you set it
>>>>>>> only if the authentication was successful but not set if it was 'used'
>>>>>>> but was unsuccessful. Made me look at it multiple times to reconstuct
>>>>>>> the logic. The var name could be better, however I also want a comment
>>>>>>> that explain exactly how we are going to manage authentication and
>>>>>>> fallbacks here as that logic is critical and is useful for anyone that
>>>>>>> is going to have to change this code later in order not to break it.
>>>>>> The variable is now gone. I re-factored the section to make the logic
>>>>>> clearer and put a nice big comment up top.
>>>>>>> - General question: how does this PRE_BIND plugin interact with
>>>>>>> ipapwd_pre_bind() in the ipa-pwd-extop() plugin ?
>>>>>>> Are you going to cause that plugin not to run by returning a result
>>>>>>> directly in this function ?
>>>>>>> Or is this plugin configured to run only after the previous one went
>>>>>>> through ?
>>>>>>> I ask because I do not see any ordering information in the cn=config
>>>>>>> plugin configuration so it is not immediately clear to me.
>>>>>> That is a good question for Nathan since he wrote this part of the
>>>>>> code...
>>>>> We would need to set the precedence if you want a predictable/guaranteed 
>>>>> execution order.  If a pre-BIND plug-in callback returns non-zero (which 
>>>>> you should do when the plug-in sends the result to the client directly), 
>>>>> it will cause other pre-bind plug-ins to not be called.  This is 
>>>>> actually how all pre-op plug-ins work.  If a pre-op callback returns an 
>>>>> error, we don't call the rest of the pre-op plug-ins in the list.
>>>> Ok, but this does not answer my question.
>>>> We definitely need to *always* run our other preop plugin as we do
>>>> sanity checks like verifying if the user is enabled/disabled etc...
>>>> Also we need to understand how to deal with migrating password auth when
>>>> OTP is enabeld.
>>>> TBH I think we should not have a separate OTP-auth plugin but we should
>>>> probably have a single plugin that handles authentication and the 2
>>>> should be merged. Keeping them separate is going to cause more harm than
>>>> good with unexpected interactions.
>>>> We could still have 2 plugins and simply move the prebind action
>>>> currently don in ipa-pwd-extop to the otp plugin by making some more
>>>> code common. But it is probably easier to just merge OTP into
>>>> ipa-pwd-extop right now than try to do a huge refactoring. We can always
>>>> refactor the ipa-pwd-extop plugin later.
>>> The attached patches encompass an initial review of the companion daemon
>>> and merge of ipa-otp into ipa-pwd-extop. Unfortunately, merging ipa-otp
>>> into ipa-pwd-extop appears to have broken something during install, but
>>> I don't have enough familiarity with 389 to understand what I've broken.
>>> If I upgrade after an install, it appears to work.
>>> An RPM with the patches is available here:
>>> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5362935
>>> Nathan / Rob / Simo, could you take a look and see what might be broken
>>> in ipa-pwd-extop?
>> While I'm not quite sure what the problem was, I do know it appeared on
>> the stock 3.2 F19 RPMs. I also fixed it by accident. I am certain it is
>> unrelated to these patches.
>> I have now tested install and upgrade with the six patches in the
>> previous email and everything is in order, including permissions. At
>> this point, we just need reviews/ACKs.
>> Nathaniel
> I tested IPA server upgrades, new installs and also adding 3.2+OTP replica for
> F18 3.1.4 IPA master. Everything seemed to work fine (when I added my patch 407
> fixing the replication), I did not see any breakage.
> Issues I found with too much logging I reported should now be fixed on github,
> so this should be OK.
> So it is an ACK from my side if Rob does not discover some blocking issue.
> Martin

We have all the acks now (some went off-list). Pushed to master, ipa-3-2.


More information about the Freeipa-devel mailing list