[Freeipa-devel] using pyhbac for CA ACLs

[Alexander Bokovoy]

On Mon, 25 May 2015, Fraser Tweedale wrote:
>Hi everyone,
>
>CA ACLs (the forthcoming `caacl' plugin) will be used to declare
>which users/hosts/services can get certificates from which CAs and
>profiles.  For v4.2, we will enforce the ACLs in the framework; the
>plan is to move ACL enforcement to Dogtag in a future release
>(https://fedorahosted.org/freeipa/ticket/5011).
>
>I have written most of the caacl plugin and now I must update
>cert-request to enforce the ACLs.  Using hbacrule as the guide, I
>had a look at pyhbac and it seems to be a reasonable fit for
>implementing this.  In particular:
>
>- "targethost" and "service" correspond nicely to "(sub)CA" and
>  "profile-id" for evaluation.
>
>- A certificate request can be for a user, host or service; these
>  will be overloaded into the pyhbac "user" concept.  But because we
>  will always know who the requesting principal is, we will only
>  ever need to deal with whatever of {user,host,service} the
>  principal actually is, to be able to evaluate access.
>
>- The "srchost" concept will be unused (therefore fixed to
>  HBAC_CATEGORY_ALL).  Perhaps there could be some future use.
>
>So, please provide feedback if you think this is a great idea or a
>terrible idea :)
So, let me re-iterate. You want to define a set of rules, to be used in
'ipa cert-request' that would grant access to (sub)CA and profiles.
These rules would be managed with commands like
  ipa cert-request-allow-access 'subCa' 'profile' [--users|--hosts|--services]
  ipa cert-request-remove-access 'subCa' 'profile' [--users|--hosts|--services]

and internally 'ipa cert-request' would use HBAC engine from SSSD to
actually perform evaluation of the rules.

Is that right? 

-- 
/ Alexander Bokovoy