20:01:12 #startmeeting barbican 20:01:13 Meeting started Mon Feb 15 20:01:12 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is redrobot. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 20:01:14 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 20:01:16 The meeting name has been set to 'barbican' 20:01:21 #topic Roll Call 20:01:25 o/ 20:01:33 o/ 20:01:38 o/ 20:01:43 o/ 20:01:45 \o/ 20:02:32 guess people are out for the US holiday? 20:02:37 o/ 20:02:41 guess so... 20:02:44 in any case, we got lots to talk about today, so let's get started! 20:02:50 #topic Action Items 20:02:57 Snowing on east coast, so may be missing for that. 20:02:57 #link http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/barbican/2016/barbican.2016-02-08-20.01.html 20:03:07 #note redrobot sucks at action items 20:03:16 hehe 20:03:25 rellerreller, I was in NYC this weekend 5 degrees!! 20:03:45 o/ 20:04:02 Trying to get something organized for the SA/Austin Barbican guild... I was hoping to be able to do something this week, but I think I won't be able to do it until next week. I'll keep y'all posted diazjf and silos 20:04:25 redrobot, thanks! yeah next week is perfect as well. 20:04:27 diazjf silos did you have a preference of whole day/ afternoon + evening / evening only ? 20:04:27 redrobot: kk. no worries. 20:04:49 redrobot, we can do an all day event 20:05:27 diazjf ok, I'll keep that in mind for tomorrow when we'll be sorting out the details. 20:05:45 as far as the security bugs / designate, I haven't made much progress there 20:05:51 o/ 20:05:52 and by not much, I mean none at all 20:05:57 redrobot, sounds good! 20:06:00 * redrobot drops head down in shame 20:06:09 o / 20:06:27 ok, moving on to today's agenda 20:06:36 which, as usua, can be found here: 20:06:38 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Barbican#Agenda 20:06:57 #topic Go over keystone middleware in Credential Factory 20:06:58 diazjf your topic 20:07:18 hey everyone, checkout https://review.openstack.org/#/c/273863/11/castellan/common/utils.py 20:07:22 rellerreller ^ 20:08:07 I was wondering if services which use keystonemiddleware auth should be able to pass the _TokenData directly from the context 20:08:22 diazjf I'd guess no since it's marked as private api 20:08:23 diazjf I did not understand that bottom comment. 20:08:45 rellerreller, example: In swift you can do "context = env.get('keystone.token_auth').user" 20:09:06 And that contains all the items needed to a keystone token 20:10:04 Is it ok to only have auth_token and project_id 20:10:07 as seen in the patch 20:10:47 I'm ok with it. 20:11:28 rellerreller, ok cool, in swift there would need to be a switch in the config or something that lets them switch between using context or config file 20:11:40 but I guess thats upto swift 20:12:05 * redrobot needs to look into the patch before having an opinion 20:12:06 I was just thinking in the swift keymaster they would want a way to switch between both 20:13:07 I'll see if I can get janie, and john to take a look at it this week 20:13:22 diazjf could swift not always use token auth type? 20:14:23 so they could use token auth type, but there needs to be a way of switching between current usesr(context for env) and service user(config) values. 20:14:52 I may be just over thinking this :/ 20:15:08 I understand. I don't think the credential factory can help much there. 20:15:46 rellerreller, yeah I was thinking of whether to have another type for auth_type for that or if it was up to swift 20:15:58 either way iteration 1 should just allow for service users 20:16:25 If they were ok with username and password then could choose that type. That would override any context passed in. 20:16:45 The performance might suffer, but I'm not sure. 20:17:34 o/ 20:17:51 It seems that if Swift will have two contexts (one for user and one for service) then code for which one to use should go in Swift. 20:18:05 rellerreller +1 20:18:26 rellerreller, understood. thanks :) 20:19:16 ok, moving on 20:19:20 #topic pycryptodome 20:19:23 #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-February/086509.html 20:19:57 In case you missed it, it appears that there's a new crypto library in town called cryptodome 20:20:05 it appears that it aims to be a drop-in replacement for pycrypto 20:20:51 however, they're not doing a very good job with compatibility, so even though they use the same namespaces, Barbican will break if you install pycryptodome 20:21:07 doesn't seem to be an issue if you install pycrypto after installing pycryptodome 20:21:57 The thread is ongoing in the ML 20:22:17 What are our dependencies on pycrypto? How much of the space does pyca/cryptography cover? 20:23:03 rellerreller last time we checked pyca/cryptography was missing a few features... that was a long time ago though, and I think pyca/cryptography should have everything we need by now. 20:23:08 redrobot: saw wail, first time to hear pycryptodome also 20:23:17 s/wail/email 20:23:38 my $0.02 is that we should move to pyca/cryptography ... mostly because pure-python crypto gives me the heebie jeebies 20:24:15 It would also be nice to be dependent on one crypto library instead of two 20:24:23 some RSA call used in pkcs11 plugin code. should be supported by cryptography also 20:24:27 rellerreller +1 20:24:40 + 1 to that 20:25:06 I'll try to see if I can get some time to work on the code changes to drop pycrypto 20:25:22 #agreed Barbican should drop pycrypto in favor of pyca/cryptography 20:25:38 +1, it's time to verify to move to py/ca cryptography 20:25:50 that's all I wanted to talk about for this topic. I'll follow up with my findings. 20:26:12 feel free to join in on the ML discussion as well 20:26:15 #topic Fernando Diaz for Core 20:26:38 Just a heads up for the core reviewers that I've nominated diazjf for the Core team. 20:26:45 #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-February/086581.html 20:26:57 Cores, please reply to the ML thread with your vote 20:27:48 whoop whoop thanks redrobot, and thanks everyone for all your help!!! 20:28:21 we'll revisit this next week to tally the votes 20:28:27 moving on 20:28:30 #topic Volunteer meeting chair for next week 20:28:56 I'll be out next Monday afternoon and need someone to chair this meeting 20:28:58 any volunteers? 20:29:29 redrobot, I can help out with that 20:29:35 diazjf awesome! thanks. 20:29:50 #info diazjf will be meeting chair on Feb 22 20:30:11 ok, moving on 20:30:11 no worries 20:30:17 #topic Barbican client cliff bug 20:30:29 silos your topic 20:30:45 k So I looked into that cliff bug from the mid-cycle. 20:31:17 Turns our when the barbican client uses the —table format. Cliff will always try to encode the returned secret in utf-8. 20:31:21 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/python-barbicanclient/+bug/1504646 20:31:21 Launchpad bug 1504646 in python-barbicanclient "Get secret for symmetric secrets returns decode error" [Undecided,In progress] - Assigned to Christopher Solis (cnsolis) 20:31:23 redrobot: thanks. 20:32:29 This is problematic because some things returned from Barbican can't be encoded into utf-8. SO what I was gonna do is just throw an error and tell the client to use a different format like 'value', or 'json'. 20:32:57 Basically I was wondering if the community is okay with not being able to 'see' the gibberish returned when retrieving things like symmetric keys through the client. 20:33:04 silos so I don't think the user actually sets --table? 20:33:13 I feel like the CLI needs some serious TLC 20:33:16 redrobot: Its default by cliff. 20:33:35 redrobot: unless the user sets it as something else. 20:33:46 from a user perspective, I want to be able to retrieve the payload for a secret, and redirect the stdout to an environment variable or file 20:34:00 I ran into the utf-8 issue while doing the content types work. 20:34:12 * rellerreller is having nightmares of content types 20:34:22 lol 20:34:29 haha 20:34:32 I still like the idea of content-types for v2 ;) 20:34:54 redrobot: I also think this topic kind of leans towards a v2 client. 20:35:13 silos I think the unified python-openstackclient could be our v2 CLI 20:35:31 redrobot: +1 20:35:40 I also like the content types for v2. 20:36:19 silos could you return the value as base64 string? My guess is that will break lots of stuff because not backwards compatible. 20:36:57 silos want to collaborate on what the unified CLI should do? ... I want to approach it from the POV of someone using the CLI to store/retrieve keys, without tying ourselves to REST workflows 20:37:15 rellerreller yeah... that definitely sound like a breaking change 20:37:17 rellerreller: Hmmm I haven't tried that. It's not that it can't be returned in its normal encoding. It's just that cliff will try to make it utf-8 when presenting it to the user. 20:37:20 I want to be able to do stuff like: 20:37:40 redrobot: Yea! I definitely want to see the client get some TLC. 20:37:45 openstack key-manager store < cat $PWD/my-secret-file 20:37:58 and 20:38:17 openstack key-manager payload https:///someurl > my-retrieved-secret 20:38:39 but I have no idea if cliff would even be able to do that.. 20:38:57 #action silos and redrobot to collaborate on an etherpad for what the unified CLI should look like 20:39:15 silos as far as this bug is concerned... is it possible to default to just raw output when you're fetching the payload? 20:39:28 silos and leave the payload out of the secret table when showing the metadata? 20:40:14 redrobot: I'm not sure. But I can definitely look into it. 20:40:47 redrobot: It would make it a lot easier if the default was something like value. 20:42:06 silos cool, we can revisit the bug next week after you've had a chance to dig into it some more 20:42:21 redrobot: sounds good. Looks like we have a good roadmap for the client. 20:43:11 I think that's all from me. thanks! 20:43:14 ok, that's all we had on the agenda for today 20:43:19 #topic Open Discussion 20:43:29 any patches that are in need of review? 20:43:35 or other topics we haven't covered? 20:43:56 redrobot yes https://review.openstack.org/#/c/279371/ 20:44:12 pending castellan spec if anyone has some free time: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/246546/ 20:44:21 silos reviewing now 20:44:32 rellerreller: thanks! 20:44:40 I have a couple baby patches https://review.openstack.org/#/c/263000/ https://review.openstack.org/#/c/277202/ 20:44:54 redrobot another affected cmd by p11 perf patch 20:45:10 jhfeng ok, I'll take a look at it. 20:45:16 If some people can take a look at the database cleanup: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/269903/ 20:45:55 redrobot: thx, let me know if I need open a bug report also 20:47:13 any other topics/patches? If not we can have 10 min of our day back 20:48:40 alrighty then, sounds like this is a wrap! 20:48:43 thanks everyone for coming 20:48:47 #endmeeting