Authentication and ACLs
Requests to the RADOS Gateway (RGW) can be either authenticated or unauthenticated. RGW assumes unauthenticated requests are sent by an anonymous user. RGW supports canned ACLs.
Authentication
Authenticating a request requires including an access key and a Hash-based Message Authentication Code (HMAC) in the request before it is sent to the RGW server. RGW uses an S3-compatible authentication approach.
HTTP/1.1
PUT /buckets/bucket/object.mpeg
Host: cname.domain.com
Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2012 00:01:01 +0000
Content-Encoding: mpeg
Content-Length: 9999999
Authorization: AWS {access-key}:{hash-of-header-and-secret}
In the foregoing example, replace {access-key}
with the value for your access
key ID followed by a colon (:
). Replace {hash-of-header-and-secret}
with
a hash of the header string and the secret corresponding to the access key ID.
To generate the hash of the header string and secret, you must:
Get the value of the header string.
Normalize the request header string into canonical form.
Generate an HMAC using a SHA-1 hashing algorithm. See RFC 2104 and HMAC for details.
Encode the
hmac
result as base-64.
To normalize the header into canonical form:
Get all fields beginning with
x-amz-
.Ensure that the fields are all lowercase.
Sort the fields lexicographically.
Combine multiple instances of the same field name into a single field and separate the field values with a comma.
Replace white space and line breaks in field values with a single space.
Remove white space before and after colons.
Append a new line after each field.
Merge the fields back into the header.
Replace the {hash-of-header-and-secret}
with the base-64 encoded HMAC string.
Authentication against OpenStack Keystone
In a radosgw instance that is configured with authentication against OpenStack Keystone, it is possible to use Keystone as an authoritative source for S3 API authentication. To do so, you must set:
the
rgw keystone
configuration options explained in Integrating with OpenStack Keystone,rgw s3 auth use keystone = true
.
In addition, a user wishing to use the S3 API must obtain an AWS-style
access key and secret key. They can do so with the openstack ec2
credentials create
command:
$ openstack --os-interface public ec2 credentials create
+------------+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Field | Value |
+------------+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| access | c921676aaabbccdeadbeef7e8b0eeb2c |
| links | {u'self': u'https://auth.example.com:5000/v3/users/7ecbebaffeabbddeadbeefa23267ccbb24/credentials/OS-EC2/c921676aaabbccdeadbeef7e8b0eeb2c'} |
| project_id | 5ed51981aab4679851adeadbeef6ebf7 |
| secret | ******************************** |
| trust_id | None |
| user_id | 7ecbebaffeabbddeadbeefa23267cc24 |
+------------+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
The thus-generated access and secret key can then be used for S3 API access to radosgw.
Note
Consider that most production radosgw deployments authenticating against OpenStack Keystone are also set up for RGW Multi-tenancy, for which special considerations apply with respect to S3 signed URLs and public read ACLs.
Access Control Lists (ACLs)
RGW supports S3-compatible ACL functionality. An ACL is a list of access grants that specify which operations a user can perform on a bucket or on an object. Each grant has a different meaning when applied to a bucket versus applied to an object:
Permission |
Bucket |
Object |
---|---|---|
|
Grantee can list the objects in the bucket. |
Grantee can read the object. |
|
Grantee can write or delete objects in the bucket. |
N/A |
|
Grantee can read bucket ACL. |
Grantee can read the object ACL. |
|
Grantee can write bucket ACL. |
Grantee can write to the object ACL. |
|
Grantee has full permissions for object in the bucket. |
Grantee can read or write to the object ACL. |
Internally, S3 operations are mapped to ACL permissions thus:
Operation |
Permission |
---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Some mappings, (e.g. s3:CreateBucket
to WRITE
) are not
applicable to S3 operation, but are required to allow Swift and S3 to
access the same resources when things like Swift user ACLs are in
play. This is one of the many reasons that you should use S3 bucket
policies rather than S3 ACLs when possible.