[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Connection Management in Multi-tenancy Scenario

Another clear solution is for connection management to go through the
[upcoming] REST API we've been talking about. Then of course we'll need one
permission per connection and a "all_connections" perm that can be added to
roles (much like DAGs but for connections).


On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 7:25 AM Ash Berlin-Taylor <ash@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> You are correct that currently all DAGs can access all connections and
> variables.
> The other thing to bear in mind: currently PythonOperators have an active
> connection to the metadata DB where connections are stored, so at best this
> is "co-operative" security, to prevent one team from accessing another
> team's connections, and not a hard barrier against an even mildly
> determined attacker.
> As for the implementation of it: it would be worth looking to see if we
> can use the Permissions model built in to FAB (Flask App Builder) that we
> are using in the RBAC-based UI. This would allow for much more granular
> permissions, and provides a pre-existing management UI for it to.
> I don't know if this would make the work dependent on the (in progress?)
> DAG-level access controls.
> -ash
> > On 19 Sep 2018, at 15:00, Deng Xiaodong <xd.deng.r@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > Thinking of a scenario: I may have multiple users in the same Airflow
> > instance. I can use filter_by_owner feature so that each user can only
> see
> > their own DAGs. But what if their DAGs are using different data sources,
> > say owner A is using mysql_conn_a, and owner B is using mysql_conn_b, and
> > we don't want to allow them to access each other's database?
> >
> > Seems like all DAG (no matter who is the owner) can access all defined
> > connections? or have I missed something?
> >
> > If my suspicion is making sense, I think it would be necessary to have
> > values "*if_protect*" and "*owner*" for each connection. When
> "if_protect"
> > == True, only DAGs whose owner == "owner" would be able to use this
> > connection. I would like to take this up to prepare a PR.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > XD