Summary: Fixes T4122. Ref T2230. Instead of storing credentials on each repository, store them in Passphrase. This allows easy creation/management of many repositories which share credentials.
Test Plan:
- Upgraded repositories.
- Created and edited repositories.
- Pulled HTTP and SSH repositories.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2230, T4122
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7629
Summary:
This cleans up some garbage:
- We were specifying environmental variables with `X=y git ...`, but now have `setEnv()` on both `ExecFuture` and `PhutilExecPassthru`. Use `setEnv()`.
- We were specifying the working directory with `(cd %s && git ...)`, but now have `setCWD()` on both `ExecFuture` and `PhutilExecPassthru`. Use `setCWD()`.
- We were specifying the Git credentials with `ssh-agent -c (ssh-add ... && git ...)`. We can do this more cleanly with `GIT_SSH`. Use `GIT_SSH`.
- Since we have to write a script for `GIT_SSH` anyway, use the same script for Subversion and Mercurial.
This fixes two specific issues:
- Previously, we were not able to set `-o StrictHostKeyChecking=no` on Git commands, so the first time you cloned a git repo the daemons would generally prompt you to add `github.com` or whatever to `known_hosts`. Since this was non-interactive, things would mysteriously hang, in effect. With `GIT_SSH`, we can specify the flag, reducing the number of ways things can go wrong.
- This adds `LANG=C`, which probably (?) forces the language to English for all commands. Apparently you need to install special language packs or something, so I don't know that this actually works, but at least two users with non-English languages have claimed it does (see <https://github.com/facebook/arcanist/pull/114> for a similar issue in Arcanist).
At some point in the future I might want to combine the Arcanist code for command execution with the Phabricator code for command execution (they share some stuff like LANG and HGPLAIN). However, credential management is kind of messy, so I'm adopting a "wait and see" approach for now. I expect to split this at least somewhat in the future, for Drydock/Automerge if nothing else.
Also I'm not sure if we use the passthru stuff at all anymore, I may just be able to delete that. I'll check in a future diff.
Test Plan: Browsed and pulled Git, Subversion and Mercurial repositories.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2230
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7600
Summary:
Small step forward which improves existing stuff or lays groudwork for future stuff:
- Currently, to check for email verification, we have to single-query the email address on every page. Instead, denoramlize it into the user object.
- Migrate all the existing users.
- When the user verifies an email, mark them as `isEmailVerified` if the email is their primary email.
- Just make the checks look at the `isEmailVerified` field.
- Add a new check, `isUserActivated()`, to cover email-verified plus disabled. Currently, a non-verified-but-not-disabled user could theoretically use Conduit over SSH, if anyone deployed it. Tighten that up.
- Add an `isApproved` flag, which is always true for now. In a future diff, I want to add a default-on admin approval queue for new accounts, to prevent configuration mistakes. The way it will work is:
- When the queue is enabled, registering users are created with `isApproved = false`.
- Admins are sent an email, "[Phabricator] New User Approval (alincoln)", telling them that a new user is waiting for approval.
- They go to the web UI and approve the user.
- Manually-created accounts are auto-approved.
- The email will have instructions for disabling the queue.
I think this queue will be helpful for new installs and give them peace of mind, and when you go to disable it we have a better opportunity to warn you about exactly what that means.
Generally, I want to improve the default safety of registration, since if you just blindly coast through the path of least resistance right now your install ends up pretty open, and realistically few installs are on VPNs.
Test Plan:
- Ran migration, verified `isEmailVerified` populated correctly.
- Created a new user, checked DB for verified (not verified).
- Verified, checked DB (now verified).
- Used Conduit, People, Diffusion.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: chad, aran
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7572
Summary:
Ref T2230. The SVN protocol has a sensible protocol format with a good spec here:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_ra_svn/protocol
Particularly, compare this statement to the clown show that is the Mercurial wire protocol:
> It is possible to parse an item without knowing its type in advance.
WHAT A REASONABLE STATEMENT TO BE ABLE TO MAKE ABOUT A WIRE PROTOCOL
Although it makes substantially more sense than Mercurial, it's much heavier-weight than the Git or Mercurial protocols, since it isn't distributed.
It's also not possible to figure out if a request is a write request (or even which repository it is against) without proxying some of the protocol frames. Finally, several protocol commands embed repository URLs, and we need to reach into the protocol and translate them.
Test Plan: Ran various SVN commands over SSH (`svn log`, `svn up`, `svn commit`, etc).
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2230
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7556
Summary:
Ref T2230. This is substantially more complicated than Git, but mostly because Mercurial's protocol is a like 50 ad-hoc extensions cobbled together. Because we must decode protocol frames in order to determine if a request is read or write, 90% of this is implementing a stream parser for the protocol.
Mercurial's own parser is simpler, but relies on blocking reads. Since we don't even have methods for blocking reads right now and keeping the whole thing non-blocking is conceptually better, I made the parser nonblocking. It ends up being a lot of stuff. I made an effort to cover it reasonably well with unit tests, and to make sure we fail closed (i.e., reject requests) if there are any parts of the protocol I got wrong.
A lot of the complexity is sharable with the HTTP stuff, so it ends up being not-so-bad, just very hard to verify by inspection as clearly correct.
Test Plan:
- Ran `hg clone` over SSH.
- Ran `hg fetch` over SSH.
- Ran `hg push` over SSH, to a read-only repo (error) and a read-write repo (success).
Reviewers: btrahan, asherkin
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2230
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7553
Summary: Looks like this is pretty straightforward; same as the reads except mark it as needing PUSH.
Test Plan: Ran `git push`, pushed over SSH to a hosted repo.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: hach-que, aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2230
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7425
Summary:
- Add web UI for configuring SSH hosting.
- Route git reads (`git-upload-pack` over SSH).
Test Plan:
>>> orbital ~ $ git clone ssh://127.0.0.1/
Cloning into '127.0.0.1'...
Exception: Unrecognized repository path "/". Expected a path like "/diffusion/X/".
fatal: Could not read from remote repository.
Please make sure you have the correct access rights
and the repository exists.
>>> orbital ~ $ git clone ssh://127.0.0.1/diffusion/X/
Cloning into 'X'...
Exception: No repository "X" exists!
fatal: Could not read from remote repository.
Please make sure you have the correct access rights
and the repository exists.
>>> orbital ~ $ git clone ssh://127.0.0.1/diffusion/MT/
Cloning into 'MT'...
Exception: This repository is not available over SSH.
fatal: Could not read from remote repository.
Please make sure you have the correct access rights
and the repository exists.
>>> orbital ~ $ git clone ssh://127.0.0.1/diffusion/P/
Cloning into 'P'...
Exception: TODO: Implement serve over SSH.
fatal: Could not read from remote repository.
Please make sure you have the correct access rights
and the repository exists.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: hach-que, aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2230
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7421
Summary:
Fixes T2229. This sets the stage for a patch similar to D7417, but for SSH. In particular, SSH 6.2 introduced an `AuthorizedKeysCommand` directive, which lets us do this in a mostly-reasonable way without needing users to patch sshd (if they have a recent enough version, at least).
The way the `AuthorizedKeysCommand` works is that it gets run and produces an `authorized_keys`-style file fragment. This isn't ideal, because we have to dump every key into the result, but should be fine for most installs. The earlier patch against `sshd` passes the public key itself, which allows the script to just look up the key. We might use this eventually, since it can scale much better, so I haven't removed it.
Generally, auth is split into two scripts now which mostly do the same thing:
- `ssh-auth` is the AuthorizedKeysCommand auth, which takes nothing and dumps the whole keyfile.
- `ssh-auth-key` is the slightly cleaner and more scalable (but patch-dependent) version, which takes the public key and dumps only matching options.
I also reworked the argument parsing to be a bit more sane.
Test Plan:
This is somewhat-intentionally a bit obtuse since I don't really want anyone using it yet, but basically:
- Copy `phabricator-ssh-hook.sh` to somewhere like `/usr/libexec/openssh/`, chown it `root` and chmod it `500`.
- This script should probably also do a username check in the future.
- Create a copy of `sshd_config` and fix the paths/etc. Point the KeyScript at your copy of the hook.
- Start a copy of sshd (6.2 or newer) with `-f <your config file>` and maybe `-d -d -d` to foreground and debug.
- Run `ssh -p 2222 localhost` or similar.
Specifically, I did this setup and then ran a bunch of commands like:
- `ssh host` (denied, no command)
- `ssh host ls` (denied, not supported)
- `echo '{}' | ssh host conduit conduit.ping` (works)
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: hach-que, aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2229, T2230
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7419
Summary:
- Original command is in SSH_ORIGINAL_COMMAND, not normal argv.
- Use PhutilShellLexer to parse it.
- Fix a protocol encoding issue with ConduitSSHWorkflow. I think I'm going to make this protocol accept multiple commands anyway because SSH pipes are crazy expensive to build (even locally, they're ~300ms).
Test Plan: With other changes, successfully executed "arc list --conduit-uri=ssh://localhost:2222".
Reviewers: btrahan, vrana
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T550
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D4232
Summary:
- Build "sshd-auth" (for authentication) and "sshd-exec" (for command execution) binaries. These are callable by "sshd-vcs", located [[https://github.com/epriestley/sshd-vcs | in my account on GitHub]]. They are based on precursors [[https://github.com/epriestley/sshd-vcs-glue | here on GitHub]] which I deployed for TenXer about a year ago, so I have some confidence they at least basically work.
- The problem this solves is that normally every user would need an account on a machine to connect to it, and/or their public keys would all need to be listed in `~/.authorized_keys`. This is a big pain in most installs. Software like Gitosis/Gitolite solve this problem by giving you an easy way to add public keys to `~/.authorized_keys`, but this is pretty gross.
- Roughly, instead of looking in `~/.authorized_keys` when a user connects, the patched sshd instead runs `echo <public key> | sshd-auth`. The `sshd-auth` script looks up the public key and authorizes the matching user, if they exist. It also forces sshd to run `sshd-exec` instead of a normal shell.
- `sshd-exec` receives the authenticated user and any command which was passed to ssh (like `git receive-pack`) and can route them appropriately.
- Overall, this permits a single account to be set up on a server which all Phabricator users can connect to without any extra work, and which can safely execute commands and apply appropriate permissions, and disable users when they are disabled in Phabricator and all that stuff.
- Build out "sshd-exec" to do more thorough checks and setup, and delegate command execution to Workflows (they now exist, and did not when I originally built this stuff).
- Convert @btrahan's conduit API script into a workflow and slightly simplify it (ConduitCall did not exist at the time it was written).
The next steps here on the Repository side are to implement Workflows for Git, SVN and HG wire protocols. These will mostly just proxy the protocols, but also need to enforce permissions. So the approach will basically be:
- Implement workflows for stuff like `git receive-pack`.
- These workflows will implement enough of the underlying protocol to determine what resource the user is trying to access, and whether they want to read or write it.
- They'll then do a permissons check, and kick the user out if they don't have permission to do whatever they are trying to do.
- If the user does have permission, we just proxy the rest of the transaction.
Next steps on the Conduit side are more simple:
- Make ConduitClient understand "ssh://" URLs.
Test Plan: Ran `sshd-exec --phabricator-ssh-user epriestley conduit differential.query`, etc. This will get a more comprehensive test once I set up sshd-vcs.
Reviewers: btrahan, vrana
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T603, T550
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D4229
