tasks: decompose review #004 findings into 4 fix tasks + review gate
W1 (call/protocol/abort-cascade-wiring): wire AbortCascade into CallAdapter handle_stream for EVENT_ABORTED. W2 (core/endpoint-client-fingerprint): extract TLS client cert fingerprint in dispatch_quinn/dispatch_iroh. W3 (vault/mnemonic-debug-redaction): replace Mnemonic derive(Debug) with redacting impl. W4 (core/auth-apikey-resources, level: research): decide whether ApiKeyEntry should carry resources, then implement or drop from spec. review-post-impl-fixes gates on all four. Graph: 33 tasks, 12 gens.
This commit is contained in:
117
tasks/core/auth-apikey-resources.md
Normal file
117
tasks/core/auth-apikey-resources.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,117 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
id: core/auth-apikey-resources
|
||||
name: Reconcile ApiKeyEntry.resources — add field to type and populate in resolve_api_key, or drop from spec
|
||||
status: pending
|
||||
depends_on: []
|
||||
scope: narrow
|
||||
risk: low
|
||||
impact: component
|
||||
level: research
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Description
|
||||
|
||||
Three-way mismatch between spec, type, and implementation for
|
||||
resource-scoped ACLs on API-key-authenticated identities:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Spec** (`docs/architecture/crates/core/auth.md:153`):
|
||||
> "Token: ... return `Identity { id: prefix, scopes: entry.scopes,
|
||||
> resources: entry.resources }`."
|
||||
The spec references `entry.resources`.
|
||||
|
||||
- **Type** (`crates/alknet-core/src/config.rs:55–62`): `ApiKeyEntry` has
|
||||
fields `prefix, hash, scopes, description, expires_at` — there is no
|
||||
`resources` field. So `entry.resources` in the spec cannot be
|
||||
implemented as written.
|
||||
|
||||
- **Implementation** (`config.rs:113–117`): `resolve_api_key` constructs
|
||||
the resolved `Identity` with `resources: std::collections::HashMap::new()`
|
||||
— resources are always empty, regardless of what the API key grants.
|
||||
|
||||
The same gap exists in `resolve_identity_from_fingerprint`
|
||||
(config.rs:69–79), which also returns `resources: HashMap::new()`.
|
||||
|
||||
### Impact
|
||||
|
||||
Latent today: no operation in the workspace uses resource-based ACLs
|
||||
against a token- or fingerprint-resolved identity. The
|
||||
`AccessControl::resource_type` / `resource_action` fields exist in
|
||||
`OperationSpec` (spec.rs:32–37) and are tested (spec.rs:284–303), but
|
||||
those tests always hand-construct `Identity.resources` directly —
|
||||
never via the resolver path. The moment an operation declares a
|
||||
resource-scoped ACL and a caller authenticates via API key, the ACL
|
||||
check will fail with "missing resource" even if the key was granted
|
||||
that resource in config — because `resources` is always empty.
|
||||
|
||||
### This is a research/decision task, not an implementation task
|
||||
|
||||
The decomposer rule applies: **the architecture is ambiguous** on
|
||||
whether API keys should grant resource-scoped access. Two valid designs
|
||||
exist; pick one and document it before implementing. Do not implement
|
||||
until the decision is made.
|
||||
|
||||
**Option A — add `resources` to `ApiKeyEntry`** (matches current spec):
|
||||
- Add `pub resources: HashMap<String, Vec<String>>` to `ApiKeyEntry`.
|
||||
- Update `resolve_api_key` to populate `Identity.resources` from
|
||||
`entry.resources`.
|
||||
- Update `resolve_identity_from_fingerprint` similarly — either add a
|
||||
`resources` field to the fingerprint config path, or document that
|
||||
fingerprint auth grants scopes only (resources empty).
|
||||
- Update `auth.md`'s token resolution example to match the new field.
|
||||
- Define the TOML schema for `resources` in `AuthPolicy` (when a TOML
|
||||
schema is added — currently config is built in code, not parsed).
|
||||
- Resource-scoped ACLs then work for both auth paths.
|
||||
|
||||
**Option B — drop `resources` from the spec for API keys**:
|
||||
- Remove `entry.resources` from `auth.md:153`.
|
||||
- Document that API keys grant scopes only; resource-scoped access
|
||||
requires a different identity source (e.g., a future OAuth/JWT
|
||||
provider that carries resource claims).
|
||||
- `Identity.resources` stays in the type (it's used by hand-constructed
|
||||
identities in tests and by `CompositionAuthority::as_identity` for
|
||||
internal calls) but token/fingerprint resolvers always return empty.
|
||||
- Resource-scoped ACLs against token identities return `Forbidden` —
|
||||
this becomes a documented limitation, not a bug.
|
||||
|
||||
### Deliverable
|
||||
|
||||
Produce a short decision note (a paragraph in `auth.md` under
|
||||
"Identity Resolution" — or a new ADR if the decision feels
|
||||
consequential enough) that picks A or B and justifies it. Then either
|
||||
implement the chosen option in the same task (if small) or split a
|
||||
follow-up `level: implementation` task gated on this one.
|
||||
|
||||
The decision should consider: do any planned operations (in the
|
||||
upcoming alknet-ssh, alknet-fs, alknet-git crates) need resource-scoped
|
||||
ACLs on API-key identities? If yes, A. If resource ACLs are only ever
|
||||
applied to handler-internal composition identities
|
||||
(`CompositionAuthority`), B is fine and simpler.
|
||||
|
||||
## Acceptance Criteria
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Decision made: Option A or Option B
|
||||
- [ ] Decision documented in `auth.md` (or a new ADR if consequential)
|
||||
- [ ] If Option A: `ApiKeyEntry.resources` added, `resolve_api_key` populates `Identity.resources`, `resolve_identity_from_fingerprint` handling decided and documented, `auth.md:153` matches the new shape
|
||||
- [ ] If Option B: `auth.md:153` corrected to drop `entry.resources`, limitation documented
|
||||
- [ ] Either way: a test covering the chosen behavior (token resolves with resources, or token resolves with empty resources + documented limitation)
|
||||
- [ ] `cargo test -p alknet-core` succeeds
|
||||
- [ ] `cargo clippy -p alknet-core --all-targets` succeeds with no warnings
|
||||
|
||||
## References
|
||||
|
||||
- docs/reviews/004-post-implementation-sanity-check.md — W4 (full finding)
|
||||
- docs/architecture/crates/core/auth.md:152–153 — spec text referencing `entry.resources`
|
||||
- crates/alknet-core/src/config.rs:55–62 — `ApiKeyEntry` (missing `resources`)
|
||||
- crates/alknet-core/src/config.rs:69–118 — both resolvers returning empty `resources`
|
||||
- crates/alknet-call/src/registry/spec.rs:77–103 — `AccessControl::check` resource path (the consumer that would fail)
|
||||
- crates/alknet-call/src/registry/context.rs:58–65 — `CompositionAuthority::as_identity` (the internal-call path that does populate `resources`)
|
||||
|
||||
## Notes
|
||||
|
||||
> This is a `level: research` task because the fix is small but the
|
||||
> decision is not. The decomposer principle: if architecture is
|
||||
> ambiguous, do not proceed with implementation — escalate. Make the
|
||||
> decision first, then implement. If the decision is A and the
|
||||
> implementation is more than ~30 lines, split a follow-up
|
||||
> `level: implementation` task (`core/auth-apikey-resources-impl`)
|
||||
> depending on this one.
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user