-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 433
feat(Grafana): K8s serviceaccount token as authorization .spec.client.useKubeAuth
#2137
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.
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
Open
Baarsgaard
wants to merge
4
commits into
master
Choose a base branch
from
feat_k8s_serviceaccont_auth
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+198
−1
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
adc482e
feat(Grafana): useKubeAuth enables using k8s serviceacccount
Baarsgaard 6976ded
feat: Cache token by decoding it and using 'exp' claim
Baarsgaard 36f8a80
test: getBearerToken
Baarsgaard 9f29f8f
chore: Expire token 30 seconds early to mitigate mid-reconcile expira…
Baarsgaard File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should we just omit token validation? - Even though it's relatively easy to implement basic token validation (e.g. using
NewProvider
+Verifier
fromgithub.com/coreos/go-oidc/v3/oidc
), it's up to Grafana to do the actual token validation / authorization (like with any other Grafana credentials that the operator uses), the role of the operator here is just to fetch the token from the file and pass it to Grafana when making API requests. - It would also simplify the unit test as you would only need to check that the Authorization header is set to the contents of the file. WDYT?(We can discuss it further during the meeting)
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Oh yeah, I forgot that TODO comment!
We already discussed this in a weekly meeting and agreed to not validate the token aside from reading the expiration!
I will remove that comment/Change it to the reason why we do not validate the token.
And potentially simplify the test!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, I think it was @theSuess who suggested that, I just wanted to surface that conversation here as the code was still in place. We'll wait for further updates then :)
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looking at it again, since the token lifetime is fully configurable, it's probably a good idea to read the expiration but not validate the token: https://kubernetes.io/docs/tasks/configure-pod-container/configure-service-account/#launch-a-pod-using-service-account-token-projection
This allows us to dynamically set the cache timeout of the token if someone decides to shorten the lifetime.
The discussion we had last time was verifying the token signature with the JWKS downloaded from the kubernetes API, which we decided was not worth it?