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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Consistent get_<DATA_ASSET> permissions - Dashboards #1729

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 6, 2024
Merged

Consistent get_<DATA_ASSET> permissions - Dashboards #1729

merged 1 commit into from
Dec 6, 2024

Conversation

dlpzx
Copy link
Contributor

@dlpzx dlpzx commented Dec 4, 2024

Feature or Bugfix

  • Feature
  • Bugfix

Detail

This is a continuation of #1727 but for Dashboards.

  • removes GET_DASHBOARD permission check on get_dashboard
  • adds a restriction field in the Dashboard type with the restricted information
  • implement resolver to return the restricted information that checks GET_DASHBOARD permissions. Return defaults for users with no permissions
  • Adapt frontend to use the restricted fields

In addition i made some fixes in the frontend, for example, the default view I changed it to Overview because it improves the experience of a data consumer that is exploring the dashboard metadata. I also removed the forever circular progress in the viewer page if there are errors in the loading of the reader url.

Relates

Security

Please answer the questions below briefly where applicable, or write N/A. Based on
OWASP 10.

  • Does this PR introduce or modify any input fields or queries - this includes
    fetching data from storage outside the application (e.g. a database, an S3 bucket)?
    • Is the input sanitized?
    • What precautions are you taking before deserializing the data you consume?
    • Is injection prevented by parametrizing queries?
    • Have you ensured no eval or similar functions are used?
  • Does this PR introduce any functionality or component that requires authorization?
    • How have you ensured it respects the existing AuthN/AuthZ mechanisms?
    • Are you logging failed auth attempts?
  • Are you using or adding any cryptographic features?
    • Do you use a standard proven implementations?
    • Are the used keys controlled by the customer? Where are they stored?
  • Are you introducing any new policies/roles/users?
    • Have you used the least-privilege principle? How?

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.

@dlpzx dlpzx requested review from noah-paige, SofiaSazonova and petrkalos and removed request for noah-paige December 4, 2024 09:02
@dlpzx dlpzx force-pushed the fix/data-assets-perms2 branch 2 times, most recently from a0b897c to 31f9aa1 Compare December 4, 2024 14:20
@dlpzx dlpzx force-pushed the fix/data-assets-perms2 branch from 31f9aa1 to aa9100a Compare December 5, 2024 08:17
@petrkalos petrkalos mentioned this pull request Dec 5, 2024
Merged
noah-paige
noah-paige approved these changes Dec 5, 2024
View reviewed changes
frontend/src/modules/Dashboards/views/DashboardView.js
@@ -119,7 +119,7 @@ const DashboardView = () => {
const fetchItem = useCallback(async () => {
setLoading(true);
const response = await client.query(getDashboard(params.uri));
if (!response.errors) {
if (response.data.getDashboard !== null) {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

nit: dispatch all errors if no data

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

In the case of Dashboards if there are errors in getting the dashboard (=no data returned), the errors for the restricted information are not very relevant

@dlpzx dlpzx merged commit 9c5714b into main Dec 6, 2024
9 checks passed
@petrkalos petrkalos mentioned this pull request Dec 9, 2024
Merged
dlpzx pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 9, 2024
@petrkalos
fix test_get_dashboard_unauthorized (#1736)
bd25484 
### Feature or Bugfix
- Bugfix

### Detail
Before #1729 an unauthorized getDashboard query meant a global failure,
after #1729 it returns partial data and only raises an error for
`environment` and `restricted` fields.

```json
{'data': {'getDashboard': {'SamlGroupName': 'testGroup1',
                           'created': '2024-12-06 15:27:15.811303',
                           'dashboardUri': 'obfuscated_uri',
                           'description': 'No description provided',
                           'environment': None,
                           'label': '2024-12-06T14:57:28.249142',
                           'name': '2024-12-06t14-57-28-249142',
                           'owner': '[email protected]',
                           'restricted': None,
                           'tags': ['2024-12-06T14:57:28.249142'],
                           'terms': {'count': 0, 'nodes': []},
                           'userRoleForDashboard': 'Shared'}},
 'errors': [{'locations': [{'column': 17, 'line': 13}],
             'message': '\n'
                        '            An error occurred (UnauthorizedOperation) '
                        'when calling GET_DASHBOARD operation:\n'
                        '            User: [email protected] is not '
                        'authorized to perform: GET_DASHBOARD on resource: '
                        'obfuscated_uri\n'
                        '        ',
             'path': ['getDashboard', 'restricted']},
            {'locations': [{'column': 17, 'line': 17}],
             'message': '\n'
                        '            An error occurred (UnauthorizedOperation) '
                        'when calling GET_ENVIRONMENT operation:\n'
                        '            User: [email protected] is not '
                        'authorized to perform: GET_ENVIRONMENT on resource: '
                        'obfuscated_uri\n'
                        '        ',
             'path': ['getDashboard', 'environment']}]}
```

### Relates
Issue introduced at #1729

### Security
Please answer the questions below briefly where applicable, or write
`N/A`. Based on
[OWASP 10](https://owasp.org/Top10/en/).

- Does this PR introduce or modify any input fields or queries - this
includes
fetching data from storage outside the application (e.g. a database, an
S3 bucket)?
  - Is the input sanitized?
- What precautions are you taking before deserializing the data you
consume?
  - Is injection prevented by parametrizing queries?
  - Have you ensured no `eval` or similar functions are used?
- Does this PR introduce any functionality or component that requires
authorization?
- How have you ensured it respects the existing AuthN/AuthZ mechanisms?
  - Are you logging failed auth attempts?
- Are you using or adding any cryptographic features?
  - Do you use a standard proven implementations?
  - Are the used keys controlled by the customer? Where are they stored?
- Are you introducing any new policies/roles/users?
  - Have you used the least-privilege principle? How?


By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made
under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.
dlpzx added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 9, 2024
@dlpzx
Consistent get_<DATA_ASSET> permissions - Dashboards (#1729)
283fadc 
- Feature
- Bugfix

This is a continuation of
#1727 but for Dashboards.

- removes GET_DASHBOARD permission check on get_dashboard
- adds a restriction field in the Dashboard type with the restricted
information
- implement resolver to return the restricted information that checks
GET_DASHBOARD permissions. Return defaults for users with no permissions
- Adapt frontend to use the restricted fields

In addition i made some fixes in the frontend, for example, the default
view I changed it to Overview because it improves the experience of a
data consumer that is exploring the dashboard metadata. I also removed
the forever circular progress in the viewer page if there are errors in
the loading of the reader url.

- #1727

Please answer the questions below briefly where applicable, or write
`N/A`. Based on
[OWASP 10](https://owasp.org/Top10/en/).

- Does this PR introduce or modify any input fields or queries - this
includes
fetching data from storage outside the application (e.g. a database, an
S3 bucket)?
  - Is the input sanitized?
- What precautions are you taking before deserializing the data you
consume?
  - Is injection prevented by parametrizing queries?
  - Have you ensured no `eval` or similar functions are used?
- Does this PR introduce any functionality or component that requires
authorization?
- How have you ensured it respects the existing AuthN/AuthZ mechanisms?
  - Are you logging failed auth attempts?
- Are you using or adding any cryptographic features?
  - Do you use a standard proven implementations?
  - Are the used keys controlled by the customer? Where are they stored?
- Are you introducing any new policies/roles/users?
  - Have you used the least-privilege principle? How?

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made
under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.
@dlpzx dlpzx mentioned this pull request Dec 9, 2024
Merged
dlpzx added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 15, 2025
@dlpzx @mourya-33
@noah-paige @petrkalos @SofiaSazonova
2.6.2 Security features (#1737)
749ffc3 
### Feature or Bugfix
- Security

### Detail

### 🔐 Security
* Update sanitization technique for terms filtering by @noah-paige in
#1692 and in
#1693
* Move access logging to a separate environment logging bucket by
@noah-paige in #1695
* Add explicit token duration config for both JWTs by @noah-paige in
#1698
* Disable GraphQL introspection if prod sizing by @noah-paige in
#1704
* Add snyk workflow on schedule by @noah-paige in
#1705,
#1708,
#1713,
#1745 and in in
#1746
* Unify Logger Config for Tasks by @noah-paige in
#1709
* Updating overly permissive policies tagged by checkov for environment
role using least privilege principles by @mourya-33 in
#1632

Data.all permission model has been reviewed to ensure all Mutations and
Queries have proper permissions:
* Add MANAGE_SHARES permissions by @dlpzx in
#1702
* Add permission check - is tenant to update SSM parameters API by
@dlpzx in #1714
* Add GET_SHARE_OBJECT permissions to get data filters API by @dlpzx in
#1717
* Add permissions on list datasets for env group + cosmetic S3 Datasets
by @dlpzx in #1718
* Add GET_WORKSHEET permission in RUN_SQL_QUERY by @dlpzx in
#1716
* Add permissions to Quicksight monitoring service layer by @dlpzx in
#1715
* Add LIST_ENVIRONMENT_DATASETS permission for listing shared datasets
and cleanup unused code by @dlpzx in
#1719
* Add is_owner permissions to Glossary mutations + add new integration
tests by @dlpzx in #1721
* Refactor env permissions + modify getTrustAccount by @dlpzx in
#1712
* Add Feed consistent permissions by @dlpzx in
#1722
* Add Votes consistent permissions by @dlpzx in
#1724
* Consistent get_<DATA_ASSET> permissions - Dashboards by @dlpzx in
#1729


### 🧪 Test improvements
Integration tests are in sync with `main` without 2.7 planned features.
In this PR all core modules, optional modules and submodules are tested.
That includes: tenant-permissions, omics, mlstudio, votes, notifications
and backwards compatiblity of s3 shares. by @SofiaSazonova, @noah-paige
, @petrkalos and @dlpzx


In addition, the following PR adds functional tests that ensure the
permission model of data.all is not corrupted.
* ⭐ Add resource permission checks by @petrkalos in
#1711


### Dependencies
* Update FastAPI by @petrkalos in #1577 
* update fastapi dependency by @noah-paige in
#1699
* Upgrade "cross-spawn" to "7.0.5" by @dlpzx in
#1701
* Bump python runtime to bump cdk klayers cryptography version by
@noah-paige in #1707


### Relates
- List above

### Security
Please answer the questions below briefly where applicable, or write
`N/A`. Based on
[OWASP 10](https://owasp.org/Top10/en/).

- Does this PR introduce or modify any input fields or queries - this
includes
fetching data from storage outside the application (e.g. a database, an
S3 bucket)?
  - Is the input sanitized?
- What precautions are you taking before deserializing the data you
consume?
  - Is injection prevented by parametrizing queries?
  - Have you ensured no `eval` or similar functions are used?
- Does this PR introduce any functionality or component that requires
authorization?
- How have you ensured it respects the existing AuthN/AuthZ mechanisms?
  - Are you logging failed auth attempts?
- Are you using or adding any cryptographic features?
  - Do you use a standard proven implementations?
  - Are the used keys controlled by the customer? Where are they stored?
- Are you introducing any new policies/roles/users?
  - Have you used the least-privilege principle? How?


By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made
under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.

---------

Co-authored-by: mourya-33 <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Mourya Darivemula <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Noah Paige <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Petros Kalos <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Sofia Sazonova <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Sofia Sazonova <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@petrkalos petrkalos petrkalos approved these changes

@noah-paige noah-paige noah-paige approved these changes

@SofiaSazonova SofiaSazonova Awaiting requested review from SofiaSazonova

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@dlpzx @petrkalos @noah-paige