Bug 1041616 - [RFE][swift]: tempURL middleware change
Summary: [RFE][swift]: tempURL middleware change
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED UPSTREAM
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat OpenStack
Classification: Red Hat
Component: RFEs
Version: unspecified
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
: ---
Assignee: RHOS Maint
QA Contact:
URL: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/swif...
Whiteboard: upstream_milestone_none upstream_stat...
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2013-12-12 18:16 UTC by RHOS Integration
Modified: 2015-03-19 17:34 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Enhancement
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2015-03-19 17:34:59 UTC
Target Upstream Version:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description RHOS Integration 2013-12-12 18:16:42 UTC
Cloned from launchpad blueprint https://blueprints.launchpad.net/swift/+spec/tempurl-middleware-change.

Description:

The existing swift middleware has a tempURL filter for authenticating signature specified in a temporary URL. The signature algorithm used is fixed to HMAC-SHA1 (RFC 2104). In other words, the tempURL filter can handle only HMAC-SHA1 signed URLs. This is limiting if the client wants to use a different signature alogrithm. Also, should swift decide to support multiple algorithms, the tempURL filter code has to change. This calls for a signature algorithm agnostic way to validate the signature. Further, validating the signature in the middleware itself requires storing the user specified secretKey with each Swift account. As the strength of the key depends on what the customer chooses, this increases the chances of compromising the secretKey. Its desirable to de-couple security from storage and delegate validation to keystone, which offers a reliable algorithm using accessKey/secretKey pair. This also provides flexibility in supporting more signature algorithms and efficiency as keystone is stood up by its own servers. Users could have a separate key pair for the tempURL for extra security.

Specification URL (additional information):

None


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.