Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Option for read-only user access Oxidized configs #15951

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

bnoack-stepcg
Copy link

@bnoack-stepcg bnoack-stepcg commented Apr 17, 2024

Created option in oxidized settings to allow read only users to access Oxidized configs.

Please give a short description what your pull request is for

DO NOT DELETE THE UNDERLYING TEXT

Please note

Please read this information carefully. You can run ./lnms dev:check to check your code before submitting.

  • Have you followed our code guidelines?
  • If my Pull Request does some changes/fixes/enhancements in the WebUI, I have inserted a screenshot of it.
  • If my Pull Request makes discovery/polling/yaml changes, I have added/updated test data.

Testers

If you would like to test this pull request then please run: ./scripts/github-apply <pr_id>, i.e ./scripts/github-apply 5926
After you are done testing, you can remove the changes with ./scripts/github-remove. If there are schema changes, you can ask on discord how to revert.

Created option in oxidized settings to allow read only users to access Oxidized configs.
@CLAassistant
Copy link

CLAassistant commented Apr 17, 2024

CLA assistant check
All committers have signed the CLA.

Copy link
Member

@Jellyfrog Jellyfrog left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

There is a RBAC system now in librenms and we would like to start using that for authorization

Copy link
Member

@electrocret electrocret left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM. Seems like an acceptable stop-gap till we get RBAC fully developed.

Copy link
Member

@electrocret electrocret left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Just noticed Jelly's comment. I guess RBAC is further along than I thought.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants