Make user and role name constraint consistent with max document ID. #86728
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This change tries to make user and role name constraints consistent with what is currently allowed to store in the native realm (512). Because the document IDs are prefixed by either `user-` or `role-`, the actual possible max length is a funky looking 507 chars. If we choose (in the future) to allow more than 507 chars we should either consider increasing the max allowed size for document ID or consider hashing names longer than 507 in order to fit into document ID. Closes elastic#66020
…er-and-role-name-validation
|
Pinging @elastic/es-security (Team:Security) |
slobodanadamovic
added
:Security/Security
|
Hi @slobodanadamovic, I've created a changelog YAML for you. |
ywangd
approved these changes
May 16, 2022
.../core/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/xpack/core/security/action/user/SetEnabledRequest.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
x-pack/plugin/core/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/xpack/core/security/support/Validation.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
x-pack/plugin/core/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/xpack/core/security/support/Validation.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
x-pack/plugin/core/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/xpack/core/security/support/Validation.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
x-pack/plugin/core/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/xpack/core/security/support/Validation.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...ck/plugin/core/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/xpack/core/security/authz/RoleDescriptor.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
…er-and-role-name-validation
…er-and-role-name-validation
…er-and-role-name-validation
|
Some of the tests are failing due to #86877. |
ywangd
approved these changes
May 19, 2022
...e/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/xpack/core/security/support/NativeRealmValidationUtil.java
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...plugin/core/src/test/java/org/elasticsearch/xpack/core/security/support/ValidationTests.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...plugin/core/src/test/java/org/elasticsearch/xpack/core/security/support/ValidationTests.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
.../src/test/java/org/elasticsearch/xpack/security/action/user/TransportPutUserActionTests.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This change tries to make user and role name constraints consistent with
what is currently allowed to store in the native realm (512).
Because the document IDs are prefixed by either
user-orrole-,the actual possible max length is a funky looking 507 chars.
If we choose (in the future) to allow more than 507 chars we should
either consider increasing the max allowed size for document ID or
consider hashing names longer than 507 in order to fit into document ID.
Note: File realm validation is left as it was and allows max 1024 chars.
I'm not sure if this is something we should reflect in the documentation.
Closes #66020