Authorized route migration for routes owned by @elastic/security-defend-workflows #198197
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
kibanamachine
added
enhancement
kibanamachine
added
Team:Defend Workflows
|
Pinging @elastic/security-defend-workflows (Team:Defend Workflows) |
|
+@tomsonpl because |
…y-defend-workflows
…y-defend-workflows
tomsonpl
approved these changes
Nov 18, 2024
…y-defend-workflows
joeypoon
approved these changes
Nov 19, 2024
|
@elasticmachine merge upstream |
…y-defend-workflows
💛 Build succeeded, but was flaky
Failed CI StepsTest Failures
Metrics [docs]
History
|
elena-shostak
deleted the
authz-migration/authorized-routes-by-security-defend-workflows
branch
|
Starting backport for target branches: 8.x |
kibanamachine
added a commit
to kibanamachine/kibana
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 20, 2024
…nd-workflows (elastic#198197) ### Authz API migration for authorized routes This PR migrates `access:<privilege>` tags used in route definitions to new security configuration. Please refer to the documentation for more information: [Authorization API](https://docs.elastic.dev/kibana-dev-docs/key-concepts/security-api-authorization) ### **Before migration:** Access control tags were defined in the `options` object of the route: ```ts router.get({ path: '/api/path', options: { tags: ['access:<privilege_1>', 'access:<privilege_2>'], }, ... }, handler); ``` ### **After migration:** Tags have been replaced with the more robust `security.authz.requiredPrivileges` field under `security`: ```ts router.get({ path: '/api/path', security: { authz: { requiredPrivileges: ['<privilege_1>', '<privilege_2>'], }, }, ... }, handler); ``` ### What to do next? 1. Review the changes in this PR. 2. You might need to update your tests to reflect the new security configuration: - If you have tests that rely on checking `access` tags. - If you have snapshot tests that include the route definition. - If you have FTR tests that rely on checking unauthorized error message. The error message changed to also include missing privileges. ## Any questions? If you have any questions or need help with API authorization, please reach out to the `@elastic/kibana-security` team. Co-authored-by: Joey F. Poon <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Gergő Ábrahám <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Tomasz Ciecierski <[email protected]> (cherry picked from commit 0043379)
💚 All backports created successfully
Note: Successful backport PRs will be merged automatically after passing CI. Questions ?Please refer to the Backport tool documentation |
kibanamachine
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 20, 2024
…y-defend-workflows (#198197) (#200995) # Backport This will backport the following commits from `main` to `8.x`: - [Authorized route migration for routes owned by @elastic/security-defend-workflows (#198197)](#198197) <!--- Backport version: 9.4.3 --> ### Questions ? Please refer to the [Backport tool documentation](https://github.com/sqren/backport) <!--BACKPORT [{"author":{"name":"Kibana Machine","email":"[email protected]"},"sourceCommit":{"committedDate":"2024-11-20T16:31:19Z","message":"Authorized route migration for routes owned by @elastic/security-defend-workflows (#198197)\n\n### Authz API migration for authorized routes\r\n\r\nThis PR migrates `access:<privilege>` tags used in route definitions to\r\nnew security configuration.\r\nPlease refer to the documentation for more information: [Authorization\r\nAPI](https://docs.elastic.dev/kibana-dev-docs/key-concepts/security-api-authorization)\r\n\r\n### **Before migration:**\r\nAccess control tags were defined in the `options` object of the route:\r\n\r\n```ts\r\nrouter.get({\r\n path: '/api/path',\r\n options: {\r\n tags: ['access:<privilege_1>', 'access:<privilege_2>'],\r\n },\r\n ...\r\n}, handler);\r\n```\r\n\r\n### **After migration:**\r\nTags have been replaced with the more robust\r\n`security.authz.requiredPrivileges` field under `security`:\r\n\r\n```ts\r\nrouter.get({\r\n path: '/api/path',\r\n security: {\r\n authz: {\r\n requiredPrivileges: ['<privilege_1>', '<privilege_2>'],\r\n },\r\n },\r\n ...\r\n}, handler);\r\n```\r\n\r\n### What to do next?\r\n1. Review the changes in this PR.\r\n2. You might need to update your tests to reflect the new security\r\nconfiguration:\r\n - If you have tests that rely on checking `access` tags.\r\n - If you have snapshot tests that include the route definition.\r\n- If you have FTR tests that rely on checking unauthorized error\r\nmessage. The error message changed to also include missing privileges.\r\n\r\n## Any questions?\r\nIf you have any questions or need help with API authorization, please\r\nreach out to the `@elastic/kibana-security` team.\r\n\r\nCo-authored-by: Joey F. Poon <[email protected]>\r\nCo-authored-by: Gergő Ábrahám <[email protected]>\r\nCo-authored-by: Tomasz Ciecierski <[email protected]>","sha":"0043379b9881eb6107df485aad2396ddfe952f34","branchLabelMapping":{"^v9.0.0$":"main","^v8.17.0$":"8.x","^v(\\d+).(\\d+).\\d+$":"$1.$2"}},"sourcePullRequest":{"labels":["enhancement","release_note:skip","Feature:Security/Authorization","v9.0.0","Team:Defend Workflows","backport:prev-minor","ci:cloud-deploy","Authz: API migration"],"title":"Authorized route migration for routes owned by @elastic/security-defend-workflows","number":198197,"url":"https://github.com/elastic/kibana/pull/198197","mergeCommit":{"message":"Authorized route migration for routes owned by @elastic/security-defend-workflows (#198197)\n\n### Authz API migration for authorized routes\r\n\r\nThis PR migrates `access:<privilege>` tags used in route definitions to\r\nnew security configuration.\r\nPlease refer to the documentation for more information: [Authorization\r\nAPI](https://docs.elastic.dev/kibana-dev-docs/key-concepts/security-api-authorization)\r\n\r\n### **Before migration:**\r\nAccess control tags were defined in the `options` object of the route:\r\n\r\n```ts\r\nrouter.get({\r\n path: '/api/path',\r\n options: {\r\n tags: ['access:<privilege_1>', 'access:<privilege_2>'],\r\n },\r\n ...\r\n}, handler);\r\n```\r\n\r\n### **After migration:**\r\nTags have been replaced with the more robust\r\n`security.authz.requiredPrivileges` field under `security`:\r\n\r\n```ts\r\nrouter.get({\r\n path: '/api/path',\r\n security: {\r\n authz: {\r\n requiredPrivileges: ['<privilege_1>', '<privilege_2>'],\r\n },\r\n },\r\n ...\r\n}, handler);\r\n```\r\n\r\n### What to do next?\r\n1. Review the changes in this PR.\r\n2. You might need to update your tests to reflect the new security\r\nconfiguration:\r\n - If you have tests that rely on checking `access` tags.\r\n - If you have snapshot tests that include the route definition.\r\n- If you have FTR tests that rely on checking unauthorized error\r\nmessage. The error message changed to also include missing privileges.\r\n\r\n## Any questions?\r\nIf you have any questions or need help with API authorization, please\r\nreach out to the `@elastic/kibana-security` team.\r\n\r\nCo-authored-by: Joey F. Poon <[email protected]>\r\nCo-authored-by: Gergő Ábrahám <[email protected]>\r\nCo-authored-by: Tomasz Ciecierski <[email protected]>","sha":"0043379b9881eb6107df485aad2396ddfe952f34"}},"sourceBranch":"main","suggestedTargetBranches":[],"targetPullRequestStates":[{"branch":"main","label":"v9.0.0","branchLabelMappingKey":"^v9.0.0$","isSourceBranch":true,"state":"MERGED","url":"https://github.com/elastic/kibana/pull/198197","number":198197,"mergeCommit":{"message":"Authorized route migration for routes owned by @elastic/security-defend-workflows (#198197)\n\n### Authz API migration for authorized routes\r\n\r\nThis PR migrates `access:<privilege>` tags used in route definitions to\r\nnew security configuration.\r\nPlease refer to the documentation for more information: [Authorization\r\nAPI](https://docs.elastic.dev/kibana-dev-docs/key-concepts/security-api-authorization)\r\n\r\n### **Before migration:**\r\nAccess control tags were defined in the `options` object of the route:\r\n\r\n```ts\r\nrouter.get({\r\n path: '/api/path',\r\n options: {\r\n tags: ['access:<privilege_1>', 'access:<privilege_2>'],\r\n },\r\n ...\r\n}, handler);\r\n```\r\n\r\n### **After migration:**\r\nTags have been replaced with the more robust\r\n`security.authz.requiredPrivileges` field under `security`:\r\n\r\n```ts\r\nrouter.get({\r\n path: '/api/path',\r\n security: {\r\n authz: {\r\n requiredPrivileges: ['<privilege_1>', '<privilege_2>'],\r\n },\r\n },\r\n ...\r\n}, handler);\r\n```\r\n\r\n### What to do next?\r\n1. Review the changes in this PR.\r\n2. You might need to update your tests to reflect the new security\r\nconfiguration:\r\n - If you have tests that rely on checking `access` tags.\r\n - If you have snapshot tests that include the route definition.\r\n- If you have FTR tests that rely on checking unauthorized error\r\nmessage. The error message changed to also include missing privileges.\r\n\r\n## Any questions?\r\nIf you have any questions or need help with API authorization, please\r\nreach out to the `@elastic/kibana-security` team.\r\n\r\nCo-authored-by: Joey F. Poon <[email protected]>\r\nCo-authored-by: Gergő Ábrahám <[email protected]>\r\nCo-authored-by: Tomasz Ciecierski <[email protected]>","sha":"0043379b9881eb6107df485aad2396ddfe952f34"}}]}] BACKPORT-->
TattdCodeMonkey
pushed a commit
to TattdCodeMonkey/kibana
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 21, 2024
…nd-workflows (elastic#198197) ### Authz API migration for authorized routes This PR migrates `access:<privilege>` tags used in route definitions to new security configuration. Please refer to the documentation for more information: [Authorization API](https://docs.elastic.dev/kibana-dev-docs/key-concepts/security-api-authorization) ### **Before migration:** Access control tags were defined in the `options` object of the route: ```ts router.get({ path: '/api/path', options: { tags: ['access:<privilege_1>', 'access:<privilege_2>'], }, ... }, handler); ``` ### **After migration:** Tags have been replaced with the more robust `security.authz.requiredPrivileges` field under `security`: ```ts router.get({ path: '/api/path', security: { authz: { requiredPrivileges: ['<privilege_1>', '<privilege_2>'], }, }, ... }, handler); ``` ### What to do next? 1. Review the changes in this PR. 2. You might need to update your tests to reflect the new security configuration: - If you have tests that rely on checking `access` tags. - If you have snapshot tests that include the route definition. - If you have FTR tests that rely on checking unauthorized error message. The error message changed to also include missing privileges. ## Any questions? If you have any questions or need help with API authorization, please reach out to the `@elastic/kibana-security` team. Co-authored-by: Joey F. Poon <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Gergő Ábrahám <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Tomasz Ciecierski <[email protected]>
paulinashakirova
pushed a commit
to paulinashakirova/kibana
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 26, 2024
…nd-workflows (elastic#198197) ### Authz API migration for authorized routes This PR migrates `access:<privilege>` tags used in route definitions to new security configuration. Please refer to the documentation for more information: [Authorization API](https://docs.elastic.dev/kibana-dev-docs/key-concepts/security-api-authorization) ### **Before migration:** Access control tags were defined in the `options` object of the route: ```ts router.get({ path: '/api/path', options: { tags: ['access:<privilege_1>', 'access:<privilege_2>'], }, ... }, handler); ``` ### **After migration:** Tags have been replaced with the more robust `security.authz.requiredPrivileges` field under `security`: ```ts router.get({ path: '/api/path', security: { authz: { requiredPrivileges: ['<privilege_1>', '<privilege_2>'], }, }, ... }, handler); ``` ### What to do next? 1. Review the changes in this PR. 2. You might need to update your tests to reflect the new security configuration: - If you have tests that rely on checking `access` tags. - If you have snapshot tests that include the route definition. - If you have FTR tests that rely on checking unauthorized error message. The error message changed to also include missing privileges. ## Any questions? If you have any questions or need help with API authorization, please reach out to the `@elastic/kibana-security` team. Co-authored-by: Joey F. Poon <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Gergő Ábrahám <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Tomasz Ciecierski <[email protected]>
CAWilson94
pushed a commit
to CAWilson94/kibana
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 12, 2024
…nd-workflows (elastic#198197) ### Authz API migration for authorized routes This PR migrates `access:<privilege>` tags used in route definitions to new security configuration. Please refer to the documentation for more information: [Authorization API](https://docs.elastic.dev/kibana-dev-docs/key-concepts/security-api-authorization) ### **Before migration:** Access control tags were defined in the `options` object of the route: ```ts router.get({ path: '/api/path', options: { tags: ['access:<privilege_1>', 'access:<privilege_2>'], }, ... }, handler); ``` ### **After migration:** Tags have been replaced with the more robust `security.authz.requiredPrivileges` field under `security`: ```ts router.get({ path: '/api/path', security: { authz: { requiredPrivileges: ['<privilege_1>', '<privilege_2>'], }, }, ... }, handler); ``` ### What to do next? 1. Review the changes in this PR. 2. You might need to update your tests to reflect the new security configuration: - If you have tests that rely on checking `access` tags. - If you have snapshot tests that include the route definition. - If you have FTR tests that rely on checking unauthorized error message. The error message changed to also include missing privileges. ## Any questions? If you have any questions or need help with API authorization, please reach out to the `@elastic/kibana-security` team. Co-authored-by: Joey F. Poon <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Gergő Ábrahám <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Tomasz Ciecierski <[email protected]>
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.
Authz API migration for authorized routes
This PR migrates
access:<privilege>tags used in route definitions to new security configuration.Please refer to the documentation for more information: Authorization API
Before migration:
Access control tags were defined in the
optionsobject of the route:After migration:
Tags have been replaced with the more robust
security.authz.requiredPrivilegesfield undersecurity:What to do next?
accesstags.Any questions?
If you have any questions or need help with API authorization, please reach out to the
@elastic/kibana-securityteam.