[nfsv4] Re: Feedback on user ID for any bis work
Rick Macklem <rick.macklem@gmail.com> Sat, 17 August 2024 22:41 UTC
Return-Path: <rick.macklem@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E73DC14F5F6 for <nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 17 Aug 2024 15:41:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.105
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.105 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1WdHhOe5fglW for <nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 17 Aug 2024 15:41:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yb1-xb31.google.com (mail-yb1-xb31.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::b31]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1A483C14F5E6 for <nfsv4@ietf.org>; Sat, 17 Aug 2024 15:41:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-yb1-xb31.google.com with SMTP id 3f1490d57ef6-e11693fbebaso3654226276.3 for <nfsv4@ietf.org>; Sat, 17 Aug 2024 15:41:07 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1723934466; x=1724539266; darn=ietf.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=xqX1C4Gkkz4OFkZeAMOpe9gss/Nn5BkFouomDP7NIXE=; b=f1zjpdNfbHYgszHQs0Oc107k9GQxsvF/PgsfcL0OhIJgJIxWG5eLohxqvMT7N9T6nd 6yJ6ztZztB6DQLHz2TRnkNdsNPZNLFr+p+WPAcTZVleFR3OeMGj/qanQauo2kIAMzGvB fH5f59lyMzUtvyy+tgk7RhRhcDsu/nNOJdf6YMD0XBYid8MUHK/mvlPsboDLv5VVbB4Q mNy7unAUOGaoRzaIK8frnOVJIgT8o215CsRZCTQ3pEB9wmeg5lV7N/9BzxNizqAc+OpF YOHhTvRLN7jSJ9Tne/kH1V5dvuAO81iIMER5IuGLD39LH5CNbbwWKjO7KDaM3PSr6CAG PJ0Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1723934466; x=1724539266; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=xqX1C4Gkkz4OFkZeAMOpe9gss/Nn5BkFouomDP7NIXE=; b=L5qsHepC/Blwrzte5XeiYeXGwQ5QpQWTi8ivJAwEhjDUeZzCVTG8Uaz9frjcW3TcQn rv8mzbO3FiyRa8h+UwHdmeDhlP5kdziJLkuaoZ0/o3vdC4q1uJlUxL6KjPtXP3CAywmJ arLEuhwbCRr3YGIN45IE8ODryP8JSXVdPSuaSLroq1TbcvrbOTprUU4lcnCJOnZzKU7n qI8YX0e30+yCV1yL80qO26PmC6OWTwwqm5czAMMLFxwJ0yMLvEaRFm0H7ZJWCEIhJDUV S01GOWDEWWKV1o86Hk+z/F+/iH3/1WCTsmAQZ2HRoG91PiZTuYPB0lObiwTfX/NxBn34 bmmA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxpDkwCa8xB7XRVObkS5e0GUJwj7dJ1rqNK23fsqUEh8lYOMcGe EbkT99Gow+dBQ4o2fwYyZvXZ9nrwsXnEl2zrlQLwyRTYuP90IEU6a9TDehVITUtH6nsNTB7hURo nnW1mpGMwAVDUrMZdVVIujGaPwsPWFYw=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHLIFEkY2PnIgR/O4EIANi+mbuINvR/xfGBQFLBvYCO7cUguWMb51djhPmkNCjE8oJPfklpfKG7If/Vot+r0Yg=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6902:e05:b0:e13:c946:d5c9 with SMTP id 3f1490d57ef6-e13c946dea2mr5535191276.15.1723934465967; Sat, 17 Aug 2024 15:41:05 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <88CFBD80-2BAA-43AE-8AA5-C032C2761266@cert.org>
In-Reply-To: <88CFBD80-2BAA-43AE-8AA5-C032C2761266@cert.org>
From: Rick Macklem <rick.macklem@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2024 15:40:56 -0700
Message-ID: <CAM5tNy7+oEc_k0pBLPCzP-ZDzTBThk3XpnWt2R9cQ6NiVw0+zw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Chris Inacio <inacio@cert.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000075d2fd061fe8c5c3"
Message-ID-Hash: RIHCQD3UBKTX4PJ574SUQT33TFDREYQP
X-Message-ID-Hash: RIHCQD3UBKTX4PJ574SUQT33TFDREYQP
X-MailFrom: rick.macklem@gmail.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-nfsv4.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: NFSv4 <nfsv4@ietf.org>
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc4
Precedence: list
Subject: [nfsv4] Re: Feedback on user ID for any bis work
List-Id: NFSv4 Working Group <nfsv4.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/nfsv4/BJNBeQP-tKsUVqBITqf9GBh6BW4>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/nfsv4>
List-Help: <mailto:nfsv4-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:nfsv4-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:nfsv4@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:nfsv4-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:nfsv4-leave@ietf.org>
On Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 8:39 AM Chris Inacio <inacio@cert.org> wrote: > Dave, All, > > INDIVIDUAL CONTRIBUTOR HAT ON - NOT CHAIR > > We need this super brief conversation in one of the interim meetings about > how user identity is communicated across NFSv4, and there are 2 options, > UID/GID ‘integer's and then loosely defined ‘string’. So I’ve been digging > into this and I would say, most definitely, do NOT remove the string. So > what I can see so far, is that UID/GID numbers are used when auth ‘sys’ is > the selected mechanism, where current the string is used when auth is tied > to GSS-API. As far as I can tell, the kerberos principal name should be > the string in the field. I certainly don’t yet have a full understanding > about how everything is connected together. (Just sending the principal is > nice and everything, but you want to be able to verify it, and HOLY RAT > HOLE ROBIN is that confusing in practice.) > > So, the thing I’m trying to make sense of, how hard would it be to support > TLS identities (X.509 certs really) instead of Kerberos. That also opens a > fairly different control domain. Kerberos is well suited to local > enterprise control. You can do that with X.509, but really, my anecdotal > experience says, X.509 certs for enterprise are too heavy a lift, but > they’re the answer when you want a more global identity. That raises the > question of target users of NFS protocol. And if we’re (or maybe that’s > just me doing it?) opening a wound there – then maybe we want to be able to > support authentication and authorization that is more cloud compatible, > which is potentially more than X.509. > > These are just thoughts and feedback on some discussions. > > Chris > > > P.S. > > The complexity of auth is BONKERS!!! So to kind of dig into this I have a > freenas server running with ZFS as the backing store. It’s the FreeBSD > variant 13.0 stream. I then deployed an LDAP and Kerberos solution > (freeipa on Fedora) to have that running on an RPi4. (This is all in my > house, by the way.) For clients, I have a _real_ menagerie of machines: Mac > OS 14.6, RPi Raspbian, FreeBSD, and Win 11. For fun, that means NFS > versions running are: Mac OS 14.0 - NFSv4.0, Raspbian/Linux NFSv4.2, > FreeBSD 13.x - NFSv4.1, Win 11 - NFSv3. I can get most of the unixen to at > least get a Kerberos user principal TGT. Machine-to-machine, host > principals are still a bit of a challenge. The Windows machine seemingly > would rather piss in my Cheerios than do what I want. (What engineer where > convinced their UI people to be able to give error messages as ‘1450 > resource unavailable’ and then you need to type `net helpmsg 1450` to get > an actual error message, which is completely useless anyway? That person > is either my hero or the devil.) And while Windows doesn’t want to > cooperate at all, the unixen management of authentication identities is its > own entire disjoint universe! ‘SSSD' on Linux, ‘nfsuserd' on FreeBSD, and > I haven’t even tried to cross that bridge on Mac. So I’m still trying to > get this collection of stuff to attempt to do full kerberos/gss-api > negotiation on a mount. > As a complete aside, the CITI NFSv4.1 client for Windows has been worked on lately and it would be really nice if someone could install/test it. (I just do not have a Windows system that could do it.) Since you mentioned Windows11 with NFSv3, I thought you just might be interested. In case you or anyone else has not seen the announcement, you can find it here: https://marc.info/?l=linux-nfs&m=172298210520795&w=4 rick > > Maybe this is why people run with auth sys! > > > _______________________________________________ > nfsv4 mailing list -- nfsv4@ietf.org > To unsubscribe send an email to nfsv4-leave@ietf.org >
- [nfsv4] Feedback on user ID for any bis work Chris Inacio
- [nfsv4] Re: Feedback on user ID for any bis work Chuck Lever III
- [nfsv4] Re: Feedback on user ID for any bis work Chuck Lever III
- [nfsv4] Re: Feedback on user ID for any bis work Pali Rohár
- [nfsv4] Re: Feedback on user ID for any bis work Chris Inacio
- [nfsv4] Re: Feedback on user ID for any bis work Rick Macklem
- [nfsv4] Re: Feedback on user ID for any bis work Chris Inacio
- [nfsv4] Re: Feedback on user ID for any bis work Chuck Lever III
- [nfsv4] Re: Feedback on user ID for any bis work Mkrtchyan, Tigran
- [nfsv4] Re: Feedback on user ID for any bis work Chris Inacio
- [nfsv4] Re: Feedback on user ID for any bis work David Noveck
- [nfsv4] Re: Feedback on user ID for any bis work Rick Macklem
- [nfsv4] Re: Feedback on user ID for any bis work Chris Inacio
- [nfsv4] Re: Feedback on user ID for any bis work Rick Macklem
- [nfsv4] Re: Feedback on user ID for any bis work Chris Inacio
- [nfsv4] Re: Feedback on user ID for any bis work Mkrtchyan, Tigran
- [nfsv4] Re: Feedback on user ID for any bis work Chuck Lever III
- [nfsv4] Re: Feedback on user ID for any bis work Chris Inacio
- [nfsv4] Re: Feedback on user ID for any bis work Mkrtchyan, Tigran
- [nfsv4] Re: Feedback on user ID for any bis work Mark Liam Brown
- [nfsv4] Re: Feedback on user ID for any bis work Chuck Lever III
- [nfsv4] Fwd: Re: Feedback on user ID for any bis … David Noveck