[chef] Re: Re: How to modify path used in signature

[DV < >]

We wanted to implement some custom Chef behavior and it wasn't too difficult to write a Chef proxy that decrypts signed requests from clients/nodes, processes them with whatever logic necessary, and re-encrypts it using appropriate keys and sends it on their way to appropriate Chef server or rejects them. Chef's mixlib-authentication library can be used for verifying signed headers and signing new requests. I think it's easiest to use Rails for the proxy as mixlib-authentication seems to work best with its Request object.

So, it definitely can be done, and then you'll have the flexibility of adding any custom behavior to it, including notifications, auditing, better access control, etc.

On Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 4:38 PM, Noah Kantrowitz < " target="_blank"> > wrote:

On Jul 19, 2014, at 4:32 PM, Ameir Abdeldayem < "> > wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I work at a big company with several different ops teams.  For the most part, each ops team maintains its own open-source Chef server.
>
> I'm looking into the feasibility of mimicking the Hosted Chef style of paths, e.g. /organizations/opsteam1.  So, for a node list from knife, the request would look like 'GET /organizations/opsteam1/nodes'.
>
> If I put this behind a proxy and rewrite the path to just '/nodes', I get a 401.  After looking at the auth page at http://docs.opscode.com/auth.html, that makes sense, since the hashed path is part of the signed request.
>
> In order for this to work, the client needs to sign the request with '/nodes' as the path, even if the target path differs.
>
> I know I'll likely need to override https://github.com/opscode/mixlib-authentication/blob/a32e96a6a8cd53e2ff2a775ef0f757550289f89b/lib/mixlib/authentication/signedheaderauth.rb#L119 in both knife and chef-client to achieve what I'm looking for.  I don't mind requiring that folks install a knife plugin or a gem for this to work.
>
> Could you give me direction on how to best achieve this?

Best? Purchase an Enterprise Chef license. While you might be able to hack this together, its going to be both highly insecure (no audit records, etc) and very breakable.

--Noah

--
Best regards, Dmitriy V.