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

NETOBSERV-972 check if cluster admin via namespaces #326

Merged
merged 1 commit into from May 23, 2023

Conversation

jotak
Copy link
Member

@jotak jotak commented May 9, 2023

Follow-up on #320, which relaxed the permission checks performed when lokiAuth is DISABLED: after discussion, we roll back to a more strict approach; however to mitigate the limitation of TokenReview (it doesn't provide a reliable way to check for cluster admins right), we verify that the user can list namespaces, assuming this is a cluster admin capability.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented May 9, 2023

Codecov Report

Merging #326 (512759c) into main (99b3a5f) will decrease coverage by 0.38%.
The diff coverage is 51.51%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #326      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   55.56%   55.18%   -0.38%     
==========================================
  Files          29       29              
  Lines        1735     1745      +10     
==========================================
- Hits          964      963       -1     
- Misses        683      694      +11     
  Partials       88       88              
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 55.18% <51.51%> (-0.38%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Impacted Files Coverage Δ
cmd/plugin-backend.go 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
pkg/kubernetes/client/client.go 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
pkg/kubernetes/auth/check_auth.go 85.24% <100.00%> (-0.24%) ⬇️

Copy link
Collaborator

@OlivierCazade OlivierCazade left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@memodi
Copy link
Contributor

memodi commented May 11, 2023

/ok-to-test

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the ok-to-test To set manually when a PR is safe to test. Triggers image build on PR. label May 11, 2023
@memodi
Copy link
Contributor

memodi commented May 17, 2023

/ok-to-test

Follow-up on netobserv#320, which relaxed the permission checks performed when
lokiAuth is DISABLED: after discussion, we roll back to a more strict
approach; however to mitigate the limitation of TokenReview (it doesn't
provide a reliable way to check for cluster admins right), we verify
that the user can list namespaces, assuming this is a cluster admin
capability.
@openshift-ci
Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented May 22, 2023

New changes are detected. LGTM label has been removed.

@github-actions github-actions bot removed the ok-to-test To set manually when a PR is safe to test. Triggers image build on PR. label May 22, 2023
@memodi
Copy link
Contributor

memodi commented May 22, 2023

/ok-to-test

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the ok-to-test To set manually when a PR is safe to test. Triggers image build on PR. label May 22, 2023
@jotak
Copy link
Member Author

jotak commented May 23, 2023

/approve

@openshift-ci
Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented May 23, 2023

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: jotak

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@jotak jotak merged commit 2190369 into netobserv:main May 23, 2023
7 of 9 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved ok-to-test To set manually when a PR is safe to test. Triggers image build on PR.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants