KCM: Offer configurable session-scoped access control to credentials

[sssd-bot]

Cloned from Pagure issue: https://pagure.io/SSSD/sssd/issue/3302

• Created at 2017-02-06 07:35:08 by jhrozek
• Assigned to nobody

---

In addition to UID-based system-wide access control we could also do per-session (as set up and reported by logind). This would be non-default, configurable (configurable per-user or system-wide? tbd)

Comments

---

Comment from jhrozek at 2017-02-10 10:21:50

Fields changed

milestone: NEEDS_TRIAGE => SSSD 1.15.3

---

Comment from jhrozek at 2017-02-24 14:23:53

Metadata Update from @jhrozek:

• Issue set to the milestone: SSSD 1.15.3

---

Comment from jhrozek at 2017-03-15 11:47:01

Metadata Update from @jhrozek:

• Custom field design_review reset
• Custom field mark reset
• Custom field patch reset
• Custom field review reset
• Custom field sensitive reset
• Custom field testsupdated reset
• Issue close_status updated to: None
• Issue set to the milestone: SSSD 1.15.4 (was: SSSD 1.15.3)

---

Comment from hedrick at 2017-07-19 18:26:50

Note: there needs to be a way for NFS to get a credential cache. So KCM would need a syntax to say "give me a credential for some session for this user." Presumably the one with the most lifetime left.

---

Comment from jhrozek at 2017-08-18 17:42:25

Metadata Update from @jhrozek:

• Custom field design_review reset (from false)
• Custom field mark reset (from false)
• Custom field patch reset (from false)
• Custom field review reset (from false)
• Custom field sensitive reset (from false)
• Custom field testsupdated reset (from false)
• Issue tagged with: cleanup-one-sixteen

---

Comment from jhrozek at 2017-08-23 17:22:16

Metadata Update from @jhrozek:

• Custom field design_review reset (from false)
• Custom field mark reset (from false)
• Custom field patch reset (from false)
• Custom field review reset (from false)
• Custom field sensitive reset (from false)
• Custom field testsupdated reset (from false)
• Issue untagged with: cleanup-one-sixteen
• Issue set to the milestone: SSSD 1.16.0 (was: SSSD 1.15.4)

---

Comment from jhrozek at 2017-10-19 20:34:00

Since we are required to release a new upstream tarball no later than Friday Oct-20, I'm moving tickets that will not be closed by that date to the next milestone, 1.16.1

---

Comment from jhrozek at 2017-10-19 20:34:05

Metadata Update from @jhrozek:

• Custom field design_review reset (from false)
• Custom field mark reset (from false)
• Custom field patch reset (from false)
• Custom field review reset (from false)
• Custom field sensitive reset (from false)
• Custom field testsupdated reset (from false)
• Issue set to the milestone: SSSD 1.16.1 (was: SSSD 1.16.0)

---

Comment from lslebodn at 2017-11-16 08:53:14

Metadata Update from @lslebodn:

• Custom field design_review reset (from false)
• Custom field mark reset (from false)
• Custom field patch reset (from false)
• Custom field review reset (from false)
• Custom field sensitive reset (from false)
• Custom field testsupdated reset (from false)
• Issue tagged with: KCM

---

Comment from jhrozek at 2017-12-18 20:32:23

Metadata Update from @jhrozek:

• Custom field design_review reset (from false)
• Custom field mark reset (from false)
• Custom field patch reset (from false)
• Custom field review reset (from false)
• Custom field sensitive reset (from false)
• Custom field testsupdated reset (from false)
• Issue tagged with: postpone-to-2-0

---

Comment from jhrozek at 2018-01-08 18:22:18

Metadata Update from @jhrozek:

• Custom field design_review reset (from false)
• Custom field mark reset (from false)
• Custom field patch reset (from false)
• Custom field review reset (from false)
• Custom field sensitive reset (from false)
• Custom field testsupdated reset (from false)
• Issue untagged with: postpone-to-2-0
• Issue set to the milestone: SSSD 2.0 (was: SSSD 1.16.1)

---

Comment from jhrozek at 2018-08-13 11:02:22

Metadata Update from @jhrozek:

• Custom field design_review reset (from false)
• Custom field mark reset (from false)
• Custom field patch reset (from false)
• Custom field review reset (from false)
• Custom field sensitive reset (from false)
• Custom field testsupdated reset (from false)
• Issue set to the milestone: SSSD 2.1 (was: SSSD 2.0)

---

Comment from jhrozek at 2019-02-22 15:51:40

Metadata Update from @jhrozek:

• Custom field design_review reset (from false)
• Custom field mark reset (from false)
• Custom field patch reset (from false)
• Custom field review reset (from false)
• Custom field sensitive reset (from false)
• Custom field testsupdated reset (from false)
• Issue set to the milestone: SSSD 2.2 (was: SSSD 2.1)

---

Comment from jhrozek at 2019-06-13 23:23:37

Metadata Update from @jhrozek:

• Custom field design_review reset (from false)
• Custom field mark reset (from false)
• Custom field patch reset (from false)
• Custom field review reset (from false)
• Custom field sensitive reset (from false)
• Custom field testsupdated reset (from false)
• Issue set to the milestone: SSSD 2.3 (was: SSSD 2.2)

---

Comment from thalman at 2020-03-11 11:46:46

Metadata Update from @thalman:

• Custom field design_review reset (from false)
• Custom field mark reset (from false)
• Custom field patch reset (from false)
• Custom field review reset (from false)
• Custom field sensitive reset (from false)
• Custom field testsupdated reset (from false)
• Issue tagged with: Future milestone

[andreboscatto]

Dear Contributor/User,

Recognizing the importance of addressing enhancements, bugs, and issues for the SSSD project's quality and reliability, we also need to consider our long-term goals and resource constraints.

After thoughtful consideration, regrettably, we are unable to address this request at this time. To avoid any misconception, we're closing it; however, we encourage continued collaboration and contributions from anyone interested.

We apologize for any inconvenience and appreciate your understanding of our resource limitations. While you're welcome to open a new issue (or reopen this one), immediate attention may not be guaranteed due to competing priorities.

Thank you once again for sharing your feedback. We look forward to ongoing collaboration to deliver the best possible solutions, supporting in any way we can.

Best regards,
André Boscatto