Some more thoughts.
First off, there are things that should be included with the CAData for
each subsystem.
1. CA signing cert (or more likely a reference to the ca cert)
2. pkcs7 chain (again this is something that could/should likely be a
reference)
3. status - ie. enabled/disabled.
4. Description -- user defined description.
For the motivation for (30 status, we do need to consider what we want
do when someone wants to delete or decommission a subCA. If we want to
keep the subCA record -- and we almost certainly need to -- we should
probably add some kind of field to enable/disable.
Second, we definitely need code to be able to issue a cert using the
subcas from the REST interface. This will allow us to actually test
that the subCA is working.
Third, if we do stick with the current REST API, I think we should
consider using something like:
POST /subcas/ca1/ca2 {"id": "ca3"} to generate a subca /ca1/ca2/ca3
Fourth, though, we need to consider carefully whether or not it makes
sense to identify a subca through
1) an identifier that contains slashes
2) an identifier that is defined by the user instead of the server. We
have currently no controls as to what names are chosen, and no clear
rationale for what should be chosen.
Much as I dislike uuids, there is a good reasons openstack uses them
everywhere.
We can discuss over IRC, but I can see many issues here.
Ade
On Tue, 2015-08-25 at 14:40 -0400, Ade Lee wrote:
Some initial comments and questions. Will have more after playing
with
it and testing. Looks pretty good so far.
1. what is
org.apache.tomcat.util.buf.UDecoder.ALLOW_ENCODED_SLASH=true
and why is it needed?
2. In CAService.java: issueX509Cert() - if ca is null, this throws an
ECAException - which, if I understand the code correctly, ends up
being
some kind of BaseException. So, if someone requests a cert and
provides a bogus caref, it will be reported as a server error instead
of a installation error?
3. CertificateAuthority.java
-- subCAHier --> rename to subCAHierarchy.
-- In the constructor, it would be useful to have example inputs in
the
method documentation so that we can see what data is expected to be
in
each of the fields. Its hard to review/understand/maintain
otherwise.
-- you have extracted initCetDatabase() and initCRLDB(), also extract
the replica repo initialization code into initReplicaRepo() or
similar.
-- loadSubCAs - could use some description in method comments about
the
structure we expect to construct here. An example config would help
understanding.
-- createSubCA
-- returns ECAException() in many different cases ie.
if the CA exists, if the parent does not exist, if there is an
error in CA creation. This makes it difficult to separate out the
things that are likely client request issues vs. server issues.
More likely, we want different exceptions that can be caught by
the
caller and handled appropriately.
-- what about uniqueness checks for the issuer DN?
4. SubCAResource.java
-- path should be subcas ? not subca ..
-- acls needed of course
5. CAEnrollProfile.java
--> could not reach CA -- that ends up being a ProfileException --
which maps to a server error? Is this a case where we need a
bad request exception instead?
6. subca.schema
-- why is it specified in a separate file? (and also in schema.ldif)
-- the subca is uniquely defined by only one MAY attribute for
nickname (which is in printable string format)? Is that
sufficient
and should that be a required attribute? Do you need to store the
issuerDN for uniqueness checks?
7. SubCAService.java
-- lets remove the commented out audit messages and functions
-- createSubCA()
-- should be some checks here on the data -- rather than passing
through to the lower level. Bad data should return
BadRequestException, including for cases where we have
existing issuerDN or caRef.
8. SubCACreateCLI -- this code would be confusing:
if (cmdArgs.length < positionalArgNames.length) {
System.err.println("Error: No "
+ positionalArgNames[cmdArgs.length]
+ " specified.");
Just specify "Insufficient params .."
9. It would be good to have a DN check here on client side -- this
can be added in a separate patch.
10. Should users be able to define the nickname? I would say "yes"
because it might make it easier to notify services like custodia for
instance to distribute keys.
11. Should we also have the option to define the token in which the
key is generated and stored? ( I think yes - in case for instance,
your HSM has limited keys). Where do the subCA keys get generated by
default -- in the software or hardware token?
12. To help clarify this, please describe what would be created
if one were to add a new subCA using the CLI at reference caRef
Specifically,
a) what database entry is created?
b) what is the nickname for the key/cert?
c) Where is the repo (ie. the suffix) for this ca's certs?
d) Exactly which resources belong to the subCA only?
8. SubCACreateCLI -- this code would be confusing:
if (cmdArgs.length < positionalArgNames.length) {
System.err.println("Error: No "
+ positionalArgNames[cmdArgs.length]
+ " specified.");
Just specify "Insufficient params .."
9. It would be good to have a DN check here on client side -- this
can
be added in a separate patch.
10. Should users be able to define the nickname? I would say "yes"
because it might make it easier to notify services like custodia for
instance to distribute keys.
11. Should we also have the option to define the token in which the
key
is generated and stored? ( I think yes - in case for instance, your
HSM has limited keys). Where do the subCA keys get generated by
default -- in the software or hardware token?
12. To help clarify this, please describe what would be created
if one were to add a new subCA using the CLI at reference caRef
Specifically,
a) what database entry is created?
b) what is the nickname for the key/cert?
c) Where is the repo (ie. the suffix) for this ca's certs?
d) Exactly which resources belong to the subCA only?
MISSING ITEMS:
These can be in a separate patch, but if so, we need tickets to track
them:
1. acls
2. auditing
3. key parameters
4. migration scripts (i.e. how to add db entries)
5. tests - we need unit/functional tests to show the data that is
expected and to do basic error checking in the client. These are
very important. Eventually, we would like tests to be a required
part of any check-in.
Ade
On Mon, 2015-08-24 at 17:27 +1000, Fraser Tweedale wrote:
> Hi team,
>
> The latest sub-CAs patches are attached. It has been a while since
> the last patchset (that was posted here, anyway) and there have
> been
> some significant changes, outlined below. (The patchset version
> skipped a couple numbers due to versions distributed privately that
> I felt were not stable enough to warrant posting to pki-devel.)
>
> Major changes:
>
> - The Java client and CLI were extracted to a separate patch
> (0044).
> - An LDAP entry for each sub-CA is written to database.
> - Database searched and sub-CAs are initialised at startup
> - Key nickname is store in / read from LDAP entry
> - Sub-CA "list" API call, client method and CLI was added
> - More resources are shared between top-level CA and sub-CAs
> - Suprious task threads and LDAP connections hunted down :)
>
> Dependencies:
>
> - Patch 0026-5 probably depends on 0045[1] for a clean merge.
> - Patch 0044-3 depends on my patch 0046[2].
>
> [1]
>
https://www.redhat.com/archives/pki-devel/2015-August/msg00072.html
> [2]
>
https://www.redhat.com/archives/pki-devel/2015-August/msg00073.html
>
> Cheers,
> Fraser
_______________________________________________
Pki-devel mailing list
Pki-devel(a)redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pki-devel