-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.8k
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
Role UX cleanup part 1: resources #1075
Comments
@kontsevoy Some initial thoughts: EnterpriseReplace
Values for the above three roles initially can be either Below is an example of how the new
Built-in rolesTwo build-in roles are always included in Enterprise. These roles can not be modified or removed by Enterprise users because they are used as defaults by Enterprise command line tools like
Command-line changes
Enterprise users continue to be able to add and delete roles additional roles with the following commands:
When viewing roles and users, we will make the following changes to
TeleportOpen source Teleport will also have the two hardcoded roles Command-line changesWhen adding users, we need to add the ability to
When viewing roles and users, we will make the following changes to
Open Questions
|
Since we also have a concept of 'permissions' in Telekube (only on UI level) it seems that our work here should be align with what we have in Telekube (or other way around). Please take a look at what we have in Telekube in regards to mapping between low-level resources and UI permissions. And this talks about intent of the detach/attach methods. Please ping me before we jump into implementation. |
As for data structure, here is what we use in Enterprise and Telekube WEB UI. Do you think we can do something similar for a better code reuse?
If possible, I would avoid fields like 'meta' or 'version' and try to keep it simple. |
@alex-kovoy I looked at the links you have provided... Will discuss later. |
Problem
Teleport roles currently do not have a nice UX. Lets start with the documentation:
http://gravitational.com/teleport/docs/2.0/enterprise/#rbac
The "Roles" chapter quickly explains what a role is and then switches to "resources", where a bunch of unknown things are dumped on the reader. Then (not implemented yet) namespaces are mentioned. Then we show a role example which actually does not mention resources and the chapter ends.
This needs to be cleaned up.
Proposal
Resources
Remove
resources
from the Role definition completely. That's just a list of very low level Teleport data structures. What purpose does it serve to mention them in a role? Trying to use them makes RBAC very hard to reason about, for example what does it even mean to have "write" access to a "proxy"?This should be step 1 towards improving RBAC usability. Step 2 would be to add higher-lever permissions, like "audit" (i.e. ability to view other people's recorded sessions, see #924 or #928 for example), etc.
Namespaces
Folks are trying (and failing) to use namespaces right now because they are not exposed properly to configuration / CLI. Proposal is to remove all traces of namespaces from 2.2.1 (i.e. in docs and configs). They will be properly re-introduced in 2.3
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: