Re: how bad would it be if we allowed all systems in communishift to get read-only access to fasjson?

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

 



On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 07:45:07AM +0100, Fabian Arrotin wrote:
> Well, you know that real data (users/groups/rbac rules/etc) are
> stored in IPA itself, which isn't reachable directly, reason why
> fasjson was created.
> But because fasjson itself doesn't store any credentials, it's just
> an "application proxy" that will just do the query for you/your app,
> reason why it needs a kerberos ticket.

Ah, thanks. That's definitely a crucial thing I was missing.


-- 
Matthew Miller
<mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Fedora Project Leader
_______________________________________________
infrastructure mailing list -- infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to infrastructure-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue




[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Development]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]

  Powered by Linux