| /openbmc/bmcweb/redfish-core/lib/ |
| H A D | telemetry_service.hpp | 432a890c Mon Jun 14 17:28:56 CDT 2021 Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com> Remove ambiguous privileges constructor
There are a number of endpoints that assume that a given routes
privileges are governed by a single set of privileges, instead of
multiple sets ORed together. To handle this, there were two overloads
of the privileges() method, one that took a vector of Privileges, and
one that took an initializer_list of const char*. Unfortunately, this
leads some code in AccountService to pick the wrong overload when it's
called like this
.privileges( {{"ConfigureUsers"}, {"ConfigureManager"},
{"ConfigureSelf"}})
This is supposed to be "User must have ConfigureUsers, or
ConfigureManager, or ConfigureSelf". Currently, because it selects the
wrong overload, it computes to "User must have ConfigureUsers AND
ConfigureManager AND ConfigureSelf.
The double braces are supposed to cause this to form a vector of
Privileges, but it appears that the initializer list gets consumed, and
the single invocation of initializer list is called. Interestingly,
trying to put in a privileges overload of
intializer_list<initializer_list<const char*>> causes the compilation to
fail with an ambiguous call error, which is what I would've expected to
see previously in this case, but alas, I'm only a novice when it comes
to how the C++ standard works in these edge cases. This is likely due
in part to the fact that they were templates of an unused template param
(seemingly copied from the previous method) and SFINAE rules around
templates.
This commit functionally removes one of the privileges overloads, and
adds a second set of braces to every privileges call that previously had
a single set of braces. Previous code will not compile now, which is
IMO a good thing.
This likely popped up in the Node class removal, because the Node class
explicitly constructs a vector of Privilege objects, ensuing it can hit
the right overload
Tested:
Ran Redfish service validator
Tested the specific use case outlined on discord with:
Creating a new user with operator privilege:
```
redfishtool -S Always -u root -p 0penBmc -vvvvvvvvv -r 192.168.7.2
AccountService adduser foo mysuperPass1 Operator
```
Then attempting to list accounts:
```
curl -vvvv --insecure --user foo:mysuperPass1
https://192.168.7.2/redfish/v1/AccountService/Accounts/foo
```
Which succeeded and returned the account in question.
Signed-off-by: Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com>
Change-Id: I83e62b70e97f56dc57d43b9081f333a02fe85495
|
| H A D | metric_report.hpp | 432a890c Mon Jun 14 17:28:56 CDT 2021 Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com> Remove ambiguous privileges constructor
There are a number of endpoints that assume that a given routes
privileges are governed by a single set of privileges, instead of
multiple sets ORed together. To handle this, there were two overloads
of the privileges() method, one that took a vector of Privileges, and
one that took an initializer_list of const char*. Unfortunately, this
leads some code in AccountService to pick the wrong overload when it's
called like this
.privileges( {{"ConfigureUsers"}, {"ConfigureManager"},
{"ConfigureSelf"}})
This is supposed to be "User must have ConfigureUsers, or
ConfigureManager, or ConfigureSelf". Currently, because it selects the
wrong overload, it computes to "User must have ConfigureUsers AND
ConfigureManager AND ConfigureSelf.
The double braces are supposed to cause this to form a vector of
Privileges, but it appears that the initializer list gets consumed, and
the single invocation of initializer list is called. Interestingly,
trying to put in a privileges overload of
intializer_list<initializer_list<const char*>> causes the compilation to
fail with an ambiguous call error, which is what I would've expected to
see previously in this case, but alas, I'm only a novice when it comes
to how the C++ standard works in these edge cases. This is likely due
in part to the fact that they were templates of an unused template param
(seemingly copied from the previous method) and SFINAE rules around
templates.
This commit functionally removes one of the privileges overloads, and
adds a second set of braces to every privileges call that previously had
a single set of braces. Previous code will not compile now, which is
IMO a good thing.
This likely popped up in the Node class removal, because the Node class
explicitly constructs a vector of Privilege objects, ensuing it can hit
the right overload
Tested:
Ran Redfish service validator
Tested the specific use case outlined on discord with:
Creating a new user with operator privilege:
```
redfishtool -S Always -u root -p 0penBmc -vvvvvvvvv -r 192.168.7.2
AccountService adduser foo mysuperPass1 Operator
```
Then attempting to list accounts:
```
curl -vvvv --insecure --user foo:mysuperPass1
https://192.168.7.2/redfish/v1/AccountService/Accounts/foo
```
Which succeeded and returned the account in question.
Signed-off-by: Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com>
Change-Id: I83e62b70e97f56dc57d43b9081f333a02fe85495
|
| H A D | message_registries.hpp | 432a890c Mon Jun 14 17:28:56 CDT 2021 Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com> Remove ambiguous privileges constructor
There are a number of endpoints that assume that a given routes
privileges are governed by a single set of privileges, instead of
multiple sets ORed together. To handle this, there were two overloads
of the privileges() method, one that took a vector of Privileges, and
one that took an initializer_list of const char*. Unfortunately, this
leads some code in AccountService to pick the wrong overload when it's
called like this
.privileges( {{"ConfigureUsers"}, {"ConfigureManager"},
{"ConfigureSelf"}})
This is supposed to be "User must have ConfigureUsers, or
ConfigureManager, or ConfigureSelf". Currently, because it selects the
wrong overload, it computes to "User must have ConfigureUsers AND
ConfigureManager AND ConfigureSelf.
The double braces are supposed to cause this to form a vector of
Privileges, but it appears that the initializer list gets consumed, and
the single invocation of initializer list is called. Interestingly,
trying to put in a privileges overload of
intializer_list<initializer_list<const char*>> causes the compilation to
fail with an ambiguous call error, which is what I would've expected to
see previously in this case, but alas, I'm only a novice when it comes
to how the C++ standard works in these edge cases. This is likely due
in part to the fact that they were templates of an unused template param
(seemingly copied from the previous method) and SFINAE rules around
templates.
This commit functionally removes one of the privileges overloads, and
adds a second set of braces to every privileges call that previously had
a single set of braces. Previous code will not compile now, which is
IMO a good thing.
This likely popped up in the Node class removal, because the Node class
explicitly constructs a vector of Privilege objects, ensuing it can hit
the right overload
Tested:
Ran Redfish service validator
Tested the specific use case outlined on discord with:
Creating a new user with operator privilege:
```
redfishtool -S Always -u root -p 0penBmc -vvvvvvvvv -r 192.168.7.2
AccountService adduser foo mysuperPass1 Operator
```
Then attempting to list accounts:
```
curl -vvvv --insecure --user foo:mysuperPass1
https://192.168.7.2/redfish/v1/AccountService/Accounts/foo
```
Which succeeded and returned the account in question.
Signed-off-by: Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com>
Change-Id: I83e62b70e97f56dc57d43b9081f333a02fe85495
|
| H A D | bios.hpp | 432a890c Mon Jun 14 17:28:56 CDT 2021 Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com> Remove ambiguous privileges constructor
There are a number of endpoints that assume that a given routes
privileges are governed by a single set of privileges, instead of
multiple sets ORed together. To handle this, there were two overloads
of the privileges() method, one that took a vector of Privileges, and
one that took an initializer_list of const char*. Unfortunately, this
leads some code in AccountService to pick the wrong overload when it's
called like this
.privileges( {{"ConfigureUsers"}, {"ConfigureManager"},
{"ConfigureSelf"}})
This is supposed to be "User must have ConfigureUsers, or
ConfigureManager, or ConfigureSelf". Currently, because it selects the
wrong overload, it computes to "User must have ConfigureUsers AND
ConfigureManager AND ConfigureSelf.
The double braces are supposed to cause this to form a vector of
Privileges, but it appears that the initializer list gets consumed, and
the single invocation of initializer list is called. Interestingly,
trying to put in a privileges overload of
intializer_list<initializer_list<const char*>> causes the compilation to
fail with an ambiguous call error, which is what I would've expected to
see previously in this case, but alas, I'm only a novice when it comes
to how the C++ standard works in these edge cases. This is likely due
in part to the fact that they were templates of an unused template param
(seemingly copied from the previous method) and SFINAE rules around
templates.
This commit functionally removes one of the privileges overloads, and
adds a second set of braces to every privileges call that previously had
a single set of braces. Previous code will not compile now, which is
IMO a good thing.
This likely popped up in the Node class removal, because the Node class
explicitly constructs a vector of Privilege objects, ensuing it can hit
the right overload
Tested:
Ran Redfish service validator
Tested the specific use case outlined on discord with:
Creating a new user with operator privilege:
```
redfishtool -S Always -u root -p 0penBmc -vvvvvvvvv -r 192.168.7.2
AccountService adduser foo mysuperPass1 Operator
```
Then attempting to list accounts:
```
curl -vvvv --insecure --user foo:mysuperPass1
https://192.168.7.2/redfish/v1/AccountService/Accounts/foo
```
Which succeeded and returned the account in question.
Signed-off-by: Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com>
Change-Id: I83e62b70e97f56dc57d43b9081f333a02fe85495
|
| H A D | roles.hpp | 432a890c Mon Jun 14 17:28:56 CDT 2021 Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com> Remove ambiguous privileges constructor
There are a number of endpoints that assume that a given routes
privileges are governed by a single set of privileges, instead of
multiple sets ORed together. To handle this, there were two overloads
of the privileges() method, one that took a vector of Privileges, and
one that took an initializer_list of const char*. Unfortunately, this
leads some code in AccountService to pick the wrong overload when it's
called like this
.privileges( {{"ConfigureUsers"}, {"ConfigureManager"},
{"ConfigureSelf"}})
This is supposed to be "User must have ConfigureUsers, or
ConfigureManager, or ConfigureSelf". Currently, because it selects the
wrong overload, it computes to "User must have ConfigureUsers AND
ConfigureManager AND ConfigureSelf.
The double braces are supposed to cause this to form a vector of
Privileges, but it appears that the initializer list gets consumed, and
the single invocation of initializer list is called. Interestingly,
trying to put in a privileges overload of
intializer_list<initializer_list<const char*>> causes the compilation to
fail with an ambiguous call error, which is what I would've expected to
see previously in this case, but alas, I'm only a novice when it comes
to how the C++ standard works in these edge cases. This is likely due
in part to the fact that they were templates of an unused template param
(seemingly copied from the previous method) and SFINAE rules around
templates.
This commit functionally removes one of the privileges overloads, and
adds a second set of braces to every privileges call that previously had
a single set of braces. Previous code will not compile now, which is
IMO a good thing.
This likely popped up in the Node class removal, because the Node class
explicitly constructs a vector of Privilege objects, ensuing it can hit
the right overload
Tested:
Ran Redfish service validator
Tested the specific use case outlined on discord with:
Creating a new user with operator privilege:
```
redfishtool -S Always -u root -p 0penBmc -vvvvvvvvv -r 192.168.7.2
AccountService adduser foo mysuperPass1 Operator
```
Then attempting to list accounts:
```
curl -vvvv --insecure --user foo:mysuperPass1
https://192.168.7.2/redfish/v1/AccountService/Accounts/foo
```
Which succeeded and returned the account in question.
Signed-off-by: Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com>
Change-Id: I83e62b70e97f56dc57d43b9081f333a02fe85495
|
| H A D | metric_report_definition.hpp | 432a890c Mon Jun 14 17:28:56 CDT 2021 Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com> Remove ambiguous privileges constructor
There are a number of endpoints that assume that a given routes
privileges are governed by a single set of privileges, instead of
multiple sets ORed together. To handle this, there were two overloads
of the privileges() method, one that took a vector of Privileges, and
one that took an initializer_list of const char*. Unfortunately, this
leads some code in AccountService to pick the wrong overload when it's
called like this
.privileges( {{"ConfigureUsers"}, {"ConfigureManager"},
{"ConfigureSelf"}})
This is supposed to be "User must have ConfigureUsers, or
ConfigureManager, or ConfigureSelf". Currently, because it selects the
wrong overload, it computes to "User must have ConfigureUsers AND
ConfigureManager AND ConfigureSelf.
The double braces are supposed to cause this to form a vector of
Privileges, but it appears that the initializer list gets consumed, and
the single invocation of initializer list is called. Interestingly,
trying to put in a privileges overload of
intializer_list<initializer_list<const char*>> causes the compilation to
fail with an ambiguous call error, which is what I would've expected to
see previously in this case, but alas, I'm only a novice when it comes
to how the C++ standard works in these edge cases. This is likely due
in part to the fact that they were templates of an unused template param
(seemingly copied from the previous method) and SFINAE rules around
templates.
This commit functionally removes one of the privileges overloads, and
adds a second set of braces to every privileges call that previously had
a single set of braces. Previous code will not compile now, which is
IMO a good thing.
This likely popped up in the Node class removal, because the Node class
explicitly constructs a vector of Privilege objects, ensuing it can hit
the right overload
Tested:
Ran Redfish service validator
Tested the specific use case outlined on discord with:
Creating a new user with operator privilege:
```
redfishtool -S Always -u root -p 0penBmc -vvvvvvvvv -r 192.168.7.2
AccountService adduser foo mysuperPass1 Operator
```
Then attempting to list accounts:
```
curl -vvvv --insecure --user foo:mysuperPass1
https://192.168.7.2/redfish/v1/AccountService/Accounts/foo
```
Which succeeded and returned the account in question.
Signed-off-by: Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com>
Change-Id: I83e62b70e97f56dc57d43b9081f333a02fe85495
|
| H A D | thermal.hpp | 432a890c Mon Jun 14 17:28:56 CDT 2021 Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com> Remove ambiguous privileges constructor
There are a number of endpoints that assume that a given routes
privileges are governed by a single set of privileges, instead of
multiple sets ORed together. To handle this, there were two overloads
of the privileges() method, one that took a vector of Privileges, and
one that took an initializer_list of const char*. Unfortunately, this
leads some code in AccountService to pick the wrong overload when it's
called like this
.privileges( {{"ConfigureUsers"}, {"ConfigureManager"},
{"ConfigureSelf"}})
This is supposed to be "User must have ConfigureUsers, or
ConfigureManager, or ConfigureSelf". Currently, because it selects the
wrong overload, it computes to "User must have ConfigureUsers AND
ConfigureManager AND ConfigureSelf.
The double braces are supposed to cause this to form a vector of
Privileges, but it appears that the initializer list gets consumed, and
the single invocation of initializer list is called. Interestingly,
trying to put in a privileges overload of
intializer_list<initializer_list<const char*>> causes the compilation to
fail with an ambiguous call error, which is what I would've expected to
see previously in this case, but alas, I'm only a novice when it comes
to how the C++ standard works in these edge cases. This is likely due
in part to the fact that they were templates of an unused template param
(seemingly copied from the previous method) and SFINAE rules around
templates.
This commit functionally removes one of the privileges overloads, and
adds a second set of braces to every privileges call that previously had
a single set of braces. Previous code will not compile now, which is
IMO a good thing.
This likely popped up in the Node class removal, because the Node class
explicitly constructs a vector of Privilege objects, ensuing it can hit
the right overload
Tested:
Ran Redfish service validator
Tested the specific use case outlined on discord with:
Creating a new user with operator privilege:
```
redfishtool -S Always -u root -p 0penBmc -vvvvvvvvv -r 192.168.7.2
AccountService adduser foo mysuperPass1 Operator
```
Then attempting to list accounts:
```
curl -vvvv --insecure --user foo:mysuperPass1
https://192.168.7.2/redfish/v1/AccountService/Accounts/foo
```
Which succeeded and returned the account in question.
Signed-off-by: Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com>
Change-Id: I83e62b70e97f56dc57d43b9081f333a02fe85495
|
| H A D | hypervisor_system.hpp | 432a890c Mon Jun 14 17:28:56 CDT 2021 Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com> Remove ambiguous privileges constructor
There are a number of endpoints that assume that a given routes
privileges are governed by a single set of privileges, instead of
multiple sets ORed together. To handle this, there were two overloads
of the privileges() method, one that took a vector of Privileges, and
one that took an initializer_list of const char*. Unfortunately, this
leads some code in AccountService to pick the wrong overload when it's
called like this
.privileges( {{"ConfigureUsers"}, {"ConfigureManager"},
{"ConfigureSelf"}})
This is supposed to be "User must have ConfigureUsers, or
ConfigureManager, or ConfigureSelf". Currently, because it selects the
wrong overload, it computes to "User must have ConfigureUsers AND
ConfigureManager AND ConfigureSelf.
The double braces are supposed to cause this to form a vector of
Privileges, but it appears that the initializer list gets consumed, and
the single invocation of initializer list is called. Interestingly,
trying to put in a privileges overload of
intializer_list<initializer_list<const char*>> causes the compilation to
fail with an ambiguous call error, which is what I would've expected to
see previously in this case, but alas, I'm only a novice when it comes
to how the C++ standard works in these edge cases. This is likely due
in part to the fact that they were templates of an unused template param
(seemingly copied from the previous method) and SFINAE rules around
templates.
This commit functionally removes one of the privileges overloads, and
adds a second set of braces to every privileges call that previously had
a single set of braces. Previous code will not compile now, which is
IMO a good thing.
This likely popped up in the Node class removal, because the Node class
explicitly constructs a vector of Privilege objects, ensuing it can hit
the right overload
Tested:
Ran Redfish service validator
Tested the specific use case outlined on discord with:
Creating a new user with operator privilege:
```
redfishtool -S Always -u root -p 0penBmc -vvvvvvvvv -r 192.168.7.2
AccountService adduser foo mysuperPass1 Operator
```
Then attempting to list accounts:
```
curl -vvvv --insecure --user foo:mysuperPass1
https://192.168.7.2/redfish/v1/AccountService/Accounts/foo
```
Which succeeded and returned the account in question.
Signed-off-by: Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com>
Change-Id: I83e62b70e97f56dc57d43b9081f333a02fe85495
|
| H A D | task.hpp | 432a890c Mon Jun 14 17:28:56 CDT 2021 Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com> Remove ambiguous privileges constructor
There are a number of endpoints that assume that a given routes
privileges are governed by a single set of privileges, instead of
multiple sets ORed together. To handle this, there were two overloads
of the privileges() method, one that took a vector of Privileges, and
one that took an initializer_list of const char*. Unfortunately, this
leads some code in AccountService to pick the wrong overload when it's
called like this
.privileges( {{"ConfigureUsers"}, {"ConfigureManager"},
{"ConfigureSelf"}})
This is supposed to be "User must have ConfigureUsers, or
ConfigureManager, or ConfigureSelf". Currently, because it selects the
wrong overload, it computes to "User must have ConfigureUsers AND
ConfigureManager AND ConfigureSelf.
The double braces are supposed to cause this to form a vector of
Privileges, but it appears that the initializer list gets consumed, and
the single invocation of initializer list is called. Interestingly,
trying to put in a privileges overload of
intializer_list<initializer_list<const char*>> causes the compilation to
fail with an ambiguous call error, which is what I would've expected to
see previously in this case, but alas, I'm only a novice when it comes
to how the C++ standard works in these edge cases. This is likely due
in part to the fact that they were templates of an unused template param
(seemingly copied from the previous method) and SFINAE rules around
templates.
This commit functionally removes one of the privileges overloads, and
adds a second set of braces to every privileges call that previously had
a single set of braces. Previous code will not compile now, which is
IMO a good thing.
This likely popped up in the Node class removal, because the Node class
explicitly constructs a vector of Privilege objects, ensuing it can hit
the right overload
Tested:
Ran Redfish service validator
Tested the specific use case outlined on discord with:
Creating a new user with operator privilege:
```
redfishtool -S Always -u root -p 0penBmc -vvvvvvvvv -r 192.168.7.2
AccountService adduser foo mysuperPass1 Operator
```
Then attempting to list accounts:
```
curl -vvvv --insecure --user foo:mysuperPass1
https://192.168.7.2/redfish/v1/AccountService/Accounts/foo
```
Which succeeded and returned the account in question.
Signed-off-by: Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com>
Change-Id: I83e62b70e97f56dc57d43b9081f333a02fe85495
|
| H A D | memory.hpp | 432a890c Mon Jun 14 17:28:56 CDT 2021 Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com> Remove ambiguous privileges constructor
There are a number of endpoints that assume that a given routes
privileges are governed by a single set of privileges, instead of
multiple sets ORed together. To handle this, there were two overloads
of the privileges() method, one that took a vector of Privileges, and
one that took an initializer_list of const char*. Unfortunately, this
leads some code in AccountService to pick the wrong overload when it's
called like this
.privileges( {{"ConfigureUsers"}, {"ConfigureManager"},
{"ConfigureSelf"}})
This is supposed to be "User must have ConfigureUsers, or
ConfigureManager, or ConfigureSelf". Currently, because it selects the
wrong overload, it computes to "User must have ConfigureUsers AND
ConfigureManager AND ConfigureSelf.
The double braces are supposed to cause this to form a vector of
Privileges, but it appears that the initializer list gets consumed, and
the single invocation of initializer list is called. Interestingly,
trying to put in a privileges overload of
intializer_list<initializer_list<const char*>> causes the compilation to
fail with an ambiguous call error, which is what I would've expected to
see previously in this case, but alas, I'm only a novice when it comes
to how the C++ standard works in these edge cases. This is likely due
in part to the fact that they were templates of an unused template param
(seemingly copied from the previous method) and SFINAE rules around
templates.
This commit functionally removes one of the privileges overloads, and
adds a second set of braces to every privileges call that previously had
a single set of braces. Previous code will not compile now, which is
IMO a good thing.
This likely popped up in the Node class removal, because the Node class
explicitly constructs a vector of Privilege objects, ensuing it can hit
the right overload
Tested:
Ran Redfish service validator
Tested the specific use case outlined on discord with:
Creating a new user with operator privilege:
```
redfishtool -S Always -u root -p 0penBmc -vvvvvvvvv -r 192.168.7.2
AccountService adduser foo mysuperPass1 Operator
```
Then attempting to list accounts:
```
curl -vvvv --insecure --user foo:mysuperPass1
https://192.168.7.2/redfish/v1/AccountService/Accounts/foo
```
Which succeeded and returned the account in question.
Signed-off-by: Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com>
Change-Id: I83e62b70e97f56dc57d43b9081f333a02fe85495
|
| H A D | power.hpp | 432a890c Mon Jun 14 17:28:56 CDT 2021 Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com> Remove ambiguous privileges constructor
There are a number of endpoints that assume that a given routes
privileges are governed by a single set of privileges, instead of
multiple sets ORed together. To handle this, there were two overloads
of the privileges() method, one that took a vector of Privileges, and
one that took an initializer_list of const char*. Unfortunately, this
leads some code in AccountService to pick the wrong overload when it's
called like this
.privileges( {{"ConfigureUsers"}, {"ConfigureManager"},
{"ConfigureSelf"}})
This is supposed to be "User must have ConfigureUsers, or
ConfigureManager, or ConfigureSelf". Currently, because it selects the
wrong overload, it computes to "User must have ConfigureUsers AND
ConfigureManager AND ConfigureSelf.
The double braces are supposed to cause this to form a vector of
Privileges, but it appears that the initializer list gets consumed, and
the single invocation of initializer list is called. Interestingly,
trying to put in a privileges overload of
intializer_list<initializer_list<const char*>> causes the compilation to
fail with an ambiguous call error, which is what I would've expected to
see previously in this case, but alas, I'm only a novice when it comes
to how the C++ standard works in these edge cases. This is likely due
in part to the fact that they were templates of an unused template param
(seemingly copied from the previous method) and SFINAE rules around
templates.
This commit functionally removes one of the privileges overloads, and
adds a second set of braces to every privileges call that previously had
a single set of braces. Previous code will not compile now, which is
IMO a good thing.
This likely popped up in the Node class removal, because the Node class
explicitly constructs a vector of Privilege objects, ensuing it can hit
the right overload
Tested:
Ran Redfish service validator
Tested the specific use case outlined on discord with:
Creating a new user with operator privilege:
```
redfishtool -S Always -u root -p 0penBmc -vvvvvvvvv -r 192.168.7.2
AccountService adduser foo mysuperPass1 Operator
```
Then attempting to list accounts:
```
curl -vvvv --insecure --user foo:mysuperPass1
https://192.168.7.2/redfish/v1/AccountService/Accounts/foo
```
Which succeeded and returned the account in question.
Signed-off-by: Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com>
Change-Id: I83e62b70e97f56dc57d43b9081f333a02fe85495
|
| H A D | processor.hpp | 432a890c Mon Jun 14 17:28:56 CDT 2021 Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com> Remove ambiguous privileges constructor
There are a number of endpoints that assume that a given routes
privileges are governed by a single set of privileges, instead of
multiple sets ORed together. To handle this, there were two overloads
of the privileges() method, one that took a vector of Privileges, and
one that took an initializer_list of const char*. Unfortunately, this
leads some code in AccountService to pick the wrong overload when it's
called like this
.privileges( {{"ConfigureUsers"}, {"ConfigureManager"},
{"ConfigureSelf"}})
This is supposed to be "User must have ConfigureUsers, or
ConfigureManager, or ConfigureSelf". Currently, because it selects the
wrong overload, it computes to "User must have ConfigureUsers AND
ConfigureManager AND ConfigureSelf.
The double braces are supposed to cause this to form a vector of
Privileges, but it appears that the initializer list gets consumed, and
the single invocation of initializer list is called. Interestingly,
trying to put in a privileges overload of
intializer_list<initializer_list<const char*>> causes the compilation to
fail with an ambiguous call error, which is what I would've expected to
see previously in this case, but alas, I'm only a novice when it comes
to how the C++ standard works in these edge cases. This is likely due
in part to the fact that they were templates of an unused template param
(seemingly copied from the previous method) and SFINAE rules around
templates.
This commit functionally removes one of the privileges overloads, and
adds a second set of braces to every privileges call that previously had
a single set of braces. Previous code will not compile now, which is
IMO a good thing.
This likely popped up in the Node class removal, because the Node class
explicitly constructs a vector of Privilege objects, ensuing it can hit
the right overload
Tested:
Ran Redfish service validator
Tested the specific use case outlined on discord with:
Creating a new user with operator privilege:
```
redfishtool -S Always -u root -p 0penBmc -vvvvvvvvv -r 192.168.7.2
AccountService adduser foo mysuperPass1 Operator
```
Then attempting to list accounts:
```
curl -vvvv --insecure --user foo:mysuperPass1
https://192.168.7.2/redfish/v1/AccountService/Accounts/foo
```
Which succeeded and returned the account in question.
Signed-off-by: Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com>
Change-Id: I83e62b70e97f56dc57d43b9081f333a02fe85495
|
| H A D | event_service.hpp | 432a890c Mon Jun 14 17:28:56 CDT 2021 Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com> Remove ambiguous privileges constructor
There are a number of endpoints that assume that a given routes
privileges are governed by a single set of privileges, instead of
multiple sets ORed together. To handle this, there were two overloads
of the privileges() method, one that took a vector of Privileges, and
one that took an initializer_list of const char*. Unfortunately, this
leads some code in AccountService to pick the wrong overload when it's
called like this
.privileges( {{"ConfigureUsers"}, {"ConfigureManager"},
{"ConfigureSelf"}})
This is supposed to be "User must have ConfigureUsers, or
ConfigureManager, or ConfigureSelf". Currently, because it selects the
wrong overload, it computes to "User must have ConfigureUsers AND
ConfigureManager AND ConfigureSelf.
The double braces are supposed to cause this to form a vector of
Privileges, but it appears that the initializer list gets consumed, and
the single invocation of initializer list is called. Interestingly,
trying to put in a privileges overload of
intializer_list<initializer_list<const char*>> causes the compilation to
fail with an ambiguous call error, which is what I would've expected to
see previously in this case, but alas, I'm only a novice when it comes
to how the C++ standard works in these edge cases. This is likely due
in part to the fact that they were templates of an unused template param
(seemingly copied from the previous method) and SFINAE rules around
templates.
This commit functionally removes one of the privileges overloads, and
adds a second set of braces to every privileges call that previously had
a single set of braces. Previous code will not compile now, which is
IMO a good thing.
This likely popped up in the Node class removal, because the Node class
explicitly constructs a vector of Privilege objects, ensuing it can hit
the right overload
Tested:
Ran Redfish service validator
Tested the specific use case outlined on discord with:
Creating a new user with operator privilege:
```
redfishtool -S Always -u root -p 0penBmc -vvvvvvvvv -r 192.168.7.2
AccountService adduser foo mysuperPass1 Operator
```
Then attempting to list accounts:
```
curl -vvvv --insecure --user foo:mysuperPass1
https://192.168.7.2/redfish/v1/AccountService/Accounts/foo
```
Which succeeded and returned the account in question.
Signed-off-by: Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com>
Change-Id: I83e62b70e97f56dc57d43b9081f333a02fe85495
|
| H A D | virtual_media.hpp | 432a890c Mon Jun 14 17:28:56 CDT 2021 Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com> Remove ambiguous privileges constructor
There are a number of endpoints that assume that a given routes
privileges are governed by a single set of privileges, instead of
multiple sets ORed together. To handle this, there were two overloads
of the privileges() method, one that took a vector of Privileges, and
one that took an initializer_list of const char*. Unfortunately, this
leads some code in AccountService to pick the wrong overload when it's
called like this
.privileges( {{"ConfigureUsers"}, {"ConfigureManager"},
{"ConfigureSelf"}})
This is supposed to be "User must have ConfigureUsers, or
ConfigureManager, or ConfigureSelf". Currently, because it selects the
wrong overload, it computes to "User must have ConfigureUsers AND
ConfigureManager AND ConfigureSelf.
The double braces are supposed to cause this to form a vector of
Privileges, but it appears that the initializer list gets consumed, and
the single invocation of initializer list is called. Interestingly,
trying to put in a privileges overload of
intializer_list<initializer_list<const char*>> causes the compilation to
fail with an ambiguous call error, which is what I would've expected to
see previously in this case, but alas, I'm only a novice when it comes
to how the C++ standard works in these edge cases. This is likely due
in part to the fact that they were templates of an unused template param
(seemingly copied from the previous method) and SFINAE rules around
templates.
This commit functionally removes one of the privileges overloads, and
adds a second set of braces to every privileges call that previously had
a single set of braces. Previous code will not compile now, which is
IMO a good thing.
This likely popped up in the Node class removal, because the Node class
explicitly constructs a vector of Privilege objects, ensuing it can hit
the right overload
Tested:
Ran Redfish service validator
Tested the specific use case outlined on discord with:
Creating a new user with operator privilege:
```
redfishtool -S Always -u root -p 0penBmc -vvvvvvvvv -r 192.168.7.2
AccountService adduser foo mysuperPass1 Operator
```
Then attempting to list accounts:
```
curl -vvvv --insecure --user foo:mysuperPass1
https://192.168.7.2/redfish/v1/AccountService/Accounts/foo
```
Which succeeded and returned the account in question.
Signed-off-by: Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com>
Change-Id: I83e62b70e97f56dc57d43b9081f333a02fe85495
|
| H A D | pcie.hpp | 432a890c Mon Jun 14 17:28:56 CDT 2021 Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com> Remove ambiguous privileges constructor
There are a number of endpoints that assume that a given routes
privileges are governed by a single set of privileges, instead of
multiple sets ORed together. To handle this, there were two overloads
of the privileges() method, one that took a vector of Privileges, and
one that took an initializer_list of const char*. Unfortunately, this
leads some code in AccountService to pick the wrong overload when it's
called like this
.privileges( {{"ConfigureUsers"}, {"ConfigureManager"},
{"ConfigureSelf"}})
This is supposed to be "User must have ConfigureUsers, or
ConfigureManager, or ConfigureSelf". Currently, because it selects the
wrong overload, it computes to "User must have ConfigureUsers AND
ConfigureManager AND ConfigureSelf.
The double braces are supposed to cause this to form a vector of
Privileges, but it appears that the initializer list gets consumed, and
the single invocation of initializer list is called. Interestingly,
trying to put in a privileges overload of
intializer_list<initializer_list<const char*>> causes the compilation to
fail with an ambiguous call error, which is what I would've expected to
see previously in this case, but alas, I'm only a novice when it comes
to how the C++ standard works in these edge cases. This is likely due
in part to the fact that they were templates of an unused template param
(seemingly copied from the previous method) and SFINAE rules around
templates.
This commit functionally removes one of the privileges overloads, and
adds a second set of braces to every privileges call that previously had
a single set of braces. Previous code will not compile now, which is
IMO a good thing.
This likely popped up in the Node class removal, because the Node class
explicitly constructs a vector of Privilege objects, ensuing it can hit
the right overload
Tested:
Ran Redfish service validator
Tested the specific use case outlined on discord with:
Creating a new user with operator privilege:
```
redfishtool -S Always -u root -p 0penBmc -vvvvvvvvv -r 192.168.7.2
AccountService adduser foo mysuperPass1 Operator
```
Then attempting to list accounts:
```
curl -vvvv --insecure --user foo:mysuperPass1
https://192.168.7.2/redfish/v1/AccountService/Accounts/foo
```
Which succeeded and returned the account in question.
Signed-off-by: Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com>
Change-Id: I83e62b70e97f56dc57d43b9081f333a02fe85495
|
| H A D | log_services.hpp | 729f55fe Wed Jun 30 13:44:29 CDT 2021 Gunnar Mills <gmills@us.ibm.com> Remove code using ambiguous privileges constructor
432a890c removed the ambiguous privileges constructor.
af61db10 added code that used this removed ambiguous privileges
constructor.
This is causing bmcweb CI and bmcweb autobumps to fail.
The error looks like:
error: cannot convert '<brace-enclosed initializer list>' to 'const
std::initializer_list<std::initializer_list<const char*> >&'
| 3102 | .privileges({"Login"})
af61db10 passed CI because it was pushed before and based on a parent
that was before 432a890c.
Tested: bmcweb builds. No further testing done.
Change-Id: I21399033d63851e3c83f3cd5a00e1227064e6941
Signed-off-by: Gunnar Mills <gmills@us.ibm.com>
729f55fe Wed Jun 30 13:44:29 CDT 2021 Gunnar Mills <gmills@us.ibm.com> Remove code using ambiguous privileges constructor
432a890c removed the ambiguous privileges constructor.
af61db10 added code that used this removed ambiguous privileges
constructor.
This is causing bmcweb CI and bmcweb autobumps to fail.
The error looks like:
error: cannot convert '<brace-enclosed initializer list>' to 'const
std::initializer_list<std::initializer_list<const char*> >&'
| 3102 | .privileges({"Login"})
af61db10 passed CI because it was pushed before and based on a parent
that was before 432a890c.
Tested: bmcweb builds. No further testing done.
Change-Id: I21399033d63851e3c83f3cd5a00e1227064e6941
Signed-off-by: Gunnar Mills <gmills@us.ibm.com>
432a890c Mon Jun 14 17:28:56 CDT 2021 Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com> Remove ambiguous privileges constructor
There are a number of endpoints that assume that a given routes
privileges are governed by a single set of privileges, instead of
multiple sets ORed together. To handle this, there were two overloads
of the privileges() method, one that took a vector of Privileges, and
one that took an initializer_list of const char*. Unfortunately, this
leads some code in AccountService to pick the wrong overload when it's
called like this
.privileges( {{"ConfigureUsers"}, {"ConfigureManager"},
{"ConfigureSelf"}})
This is supposed to be "User must have ConfigureUsers, or
ConfigureManager, or ConfigureSelf". Currently, because it selects the
wrong overload, it computes to "User must have ConfigureUsers AND
ConfigureManager AND ConfigureSelf.
The double braces are supposed to cause this to form a vector of
Privileges, but it appears that the initializer list gets consumed, and
the single invocation of initializer list is called. Interestingly,
trying to put in a privileges overload of
intializer_list<initializer_list<const char*>> causes the compilation to
fail with an ambiguous call error, which is what I would've expected to
see previously in this case, but alas, I'm only a novice when it comes
to how the C++ standard works in these edge cases. This is likely due
in part to the fact that they were templates of an unused template param
(seemingly copied from the previous method) and SFINAE rules around
templates.
This commit functionally removes one of the privileges overloads, and
adds a second set of braces to every privileges call that previously had
a single set of braces. Previous code will not compile now, which is
IMO a good thing.
This likely popped up in the Node class removal, because the Node class
explicitly constructs a vector of Privilege objects, ensuing it can hit
the right overload
Tested:
Ran Redfish service validator
Tested the specific use case outlined on discord with:
Creating a new user with operator privilege:
```
redfishtool -S Always -u root -p 0penBmc -vvvvvvvvv -r 192.168.7.2
AccountService adduser foo mysuperPass1 Operator
```
Then attempting to list accounts:
```
curl -vvvv --insecure --user foo:mysuperPass1
https://192.168.7.2/redfish/v1/AccountService/Accounts/foo
```
Which succeeded and returned the account in question.
Signed-off-by: Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com>
Change-Id: I83e62b70e97f56dc57d43b9081f333a02fe85495
|
| H A D | storage.hpp | 432a890c Mon Jun 14 17:28:56 CDT 2021 Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com> Remove ambiguous privileges constructor
There are a number of endpoints that assume that a given routes
privileges are governed by a single set of privileges, instead of
multiple sets ORed together. To handle this, there were two overloads
of the privileges() method, one that took a vector of Privileges, and
one that took an initializer_list of const char*. Unfortunately, this
leads some code in AccountService to pick the wrong overload when it's
called like this
.privileges( {{"ConfigureUsers"}, {"ConfigureManager"},
{"ConfigureSelf"}})
This is supposed to be "User must have ConfigureUsers, or
ConfigureManager, or ConfigureSelf". Currently, because it selects the
wrong overload, it computes to "User must have ConfigureUsers AND
ConfigureManager AND ConfigureSelf.
The double braces are supposed to cause this to form a vector of
Privileges, but it appears that the initializer list gets consumed, and
the single invocation of initializer list is called. Interestingly,
trying to put in a privileges overload of
intializer_list<initializer_list<const char*>> causes the compilation to
fail with an ambiguous call error, which is what I would've expected to
see previously in this case, but alas, I'm only a novice when it comes
to how the C++ standard works in these edge cases. This is likely due
in part to the fact that they were templates of an unused template param
(seemingly copied from the previous method) and SFINAE rules around
templates.
This commit functionally removes one of the privileges overloads, and
adds a second set of braces to every privileges call that previously had
a single set of braces. Previous code will not compile now, which is
IMO a good thing.
This likely popped up in the Node class removal, because the Node class
explicitly constructs a vector of Privilege objects, ensuing it can hit
the right overload
Tested:
Ran Redfish service validator
Tested the specific use case outlined on discord with:
Creating a new user with operator privilege:
```
redfishtool -S Always -u root -p 0penBmc -vvvvvvvvv -r 192.168.7.2
AccountService adduser foo mysuperPass1 Operator
```
Then attempting to list accounts:
```
curl -vvvv --insecure --user foo:mysuperPass1
https://192.168.7.2/redfish/v1/AccountService/Accounts/foo
```
Which succeeded and returned the account in question.
Signed-off-by: Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com>
Change-Id: I83e62b70e97f56dc57d43b9081f333a02fe85495
|
| H A D | certificate_service.hpp | 432a890c Mon Jun 14 17:28:56 CDT 2021 Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com> Remove ambiguous privileges constructor
There are a number of endpoints that assume that a given routes
privileges are governed by a single set of privileges, instead of
multiple sets ORed together. To handle this, there were two overloads
of the privileges() method, one that took a vector of Privileges, and
one that took an initializer_list of const char*. Unfortunately, this
leads some code in AccountService to pick the wrong overload when it's
called like this
.privileges( {{"ConfigureUsers"}, {"ConfigureManager"},
{"ConfigureSelf"}})
This is supposed to be "User must have ConfigureUsers, or
ConfigureManager, or ConfigureSelf". Currently, because it selects the
wrong overload, it computes to "User must have ConfigureUsers AND
ConfigureManager AND ConfigureSelf.
The double braces are supposed to cause this to form a vector of
Privileges, but it appears that the initializer list gets consumed, and
the single invocation of initializer list is called. Interestingly,
trying to put in a privileges overload of
intializer_list<initializer_list<const char*>> causes the compilation to
fail with an ambiguous call error, which is what I would've expected to
see previously in this case, but alas, I'm only a novice when it comes
to how the C++ standard works in these edge cases. This is likely due
in part to the fact that they were templates of an unused template param
(seemingly copied from the previous method) and SFINAE rules around
templates.
This commit functionally removes one of the privileges overloads, and
adds a second set of braces to every privileges call that previously had
a single set of braces. Previous code will not compile now, which is
IMO a good thing.
This likely popped up in the Node class removal, because the Node class
explicitly constructs a vector of Privilege objects, ensuing it can hit
the right overload
Tested:
Ran Redfish service validator
Tested the specific use case outlined on discord with:
Creating a new user with operator privilege:
```
redfishtool -S Always -u root -p 0penBmc -vvvvvvvvv -r 192.168.7.2
AccountService adduser foo mysuperPass1 Operator
```
Then attempting to list accounts:
```
curl -vvvv --insecure --user foo:mysuperPass1
https://192.168.7.2/redfish/v1/AccountService/Accounts/foo
```
Which succeeded and returned the account in question.
Signed-off-by: Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com>
Change-Id: I83e62b70e97f56dc57d43b9081f333a02fe85495
|
| /openbmc/bmcweb/include/ |
| H A D | kvm_websocket.hpp | 432a890c Mon Jun 14 17:28:56 CDT 2021 Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com> Remove ambiguous privileges constructor
There are a number of endpoints that assume that a given routes
privileges are governed by a single set of privileges, instead of
multiple sets ORed together. To handle this, there were two overloads
of the privileges() method, one that took a vector of Privileges, and
one that took an initializer_list of const char*. Unfortunately, this
leads some code in AccountService to pick the wrong overload when it's
called like this
.privileges( {{"ConfigureUsers"}, {"ConfigureManager"},
{"ConfigureSelf"}})
This is supposed to be "User must have ConfigureUsers, or
ConfigureManager, or ConfigureSelf". Currently, because it selects the
wrong overload, it computes to "User must have ConfigureUsers AND
ConfigureManager AND ConfigureSelf.
The double braces are supposed to cause this to form a vector of
Privileges, but it appears that the initializer list gets consumed, and
the single invocation of initializer list is called. Interestingly,
trying to put in a privileges overload of
intializer_list<initializer_list<const char*>> causes the compilation to
fail with an ambiguous call error, which is what I would've expected to
see previously in this case, but alas, I'm only a novice when it comes
to how the C++ standard works in these edge cases. This is likely due
in part to the fact that they were templates of an unused template param
(seemingly copied from the previous method) and SFINAE rules around
templates.
This commit functionally removes one of the privileges overloads, and
adds a second set of braces to every privileges call that previously had
a single set of braces. Previous code will not compile now, which is
IMO a good thing.
This likely popped up in the Node class removal, because the Node class
explicitly constructs a vector of Privilege objects, ensuing it can hit
the right overload
Tested:
Ran Redfish service validator
Tested the specific use case outlined on discord with:
Creating a new user with operator privilege:
```
redfishtool -S Always -u root -p 0penBmc -vvvvvvvvv -r 192.168.7.2
AccountService adduser foo mysuperPass1 Operator
```
Then attempting to list accounts:
```
curl -vvvv --insecure --user foo:mysuperPass1
https://192.168.7.2/redfish/v1/AccountService/Accounts/foo
```
Which succeeded and returned the account in question.
Signed-off-by: Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com>
Change-Id: I83e62b70e97f56dc57d43b9081f333a02fe85495
|
| H A D | image_upload.hpp | 432a890c Mon Jun 14 17:28:56 CDT 2021 Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com> Remove ambiguous privileges constructor
There are a number of endpoints that assume that a given routes
privileges are governed by a single set of privileges, instead of
multiple sets ORed together. To handle this, there were two overloads
of the privileges() method, one that took a vector of Privileges, and
one that took an initializer_list of const char*. Unfortunately, this
leads some code in AccountService to pick the wrong overload when it's
called like this
.privileges( {{"ConfigureUsers"}, {"ConfigureManager"},
{"ConfigureSelf"}})
This is supposed to be "User must have ConfigureUsers, or
ConfigureManager, or ConfigureSelf". Currently, because it selects the
wrong overload, it computes to "User must have ConfigureUsers AND
ConfigureManager AND ConfigureSelf.
The double braces are supposed to cause this to form a vector of
Privileges, but it appears that the initializer list gets consumed, and
the single invocation of initializer list is called. Interestingly,
trying to put in a privileges overload of
intializer_list<initializer_list<const char*>> causes the compilation to
fail with an ambiguous call error, which is what I would've expected to
see previously in this case, but alas, I'm only a novice when it comes
to how the C++ standard works in these edge cases. This is likely due
in part to the fact that they were templates of an unused template param
(seemingly copied from the previous method) and SFINAE rules around
templates.
This commit functionally removes one of the privileges overloads, and
adds a second set of braces to every privileges call that previously had
a single set of braces. Previous code will not compile now, which is
IMO a good thing.
This likely popped up in the Node class removal, because the Node class
explicitly constructs a vector of Privilege objects, ensuing it can hit
the right overload
Tested:
Ran Redfish service validator
Tested the specific use case outlined on discord with:
Creating a new user with operator privilege:
```
redfishtool -S Always -u root -p 0penBmc -vvvvvvvvv -r 192.168.7.2
AccountService adduser foo mysuperPass1 Operator
```
Then attempting to list accounts:
```
curl -vvvv --insecure --user foo:mysuperPass1
https://192.168.7.2/redfish/v1/AccountService/Accounts/foo
```
Which succeeded and returned the account in question.
Signed-off-by: Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com>
Change-Id: I83e62b70e97f56dc57d43b9081f333a02fe85495
|
| H A D | vm_websocket.hpp | 432a890c Mon Jun 14 17:28:56 CDT 2021 Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com> Remove ambiguous privileges constructor
There are a number of endpoints that assume that a given routes
privileges are governed by a single set of privileges, instead of
multiple sets ORed together. To handle this, there were two overloads
of the privileges() method, one that took a vector of Privileges, and
one that took an initializer_list of const char*. Unfortunately, this
leads some code in AccountService to pick the wrong overload when it's
called like this
.privileges( {{"ConfigureUsers"}, {"ConfigureManager"},
{"ConfigureSelf"}})
This is supposed to be "User must have ConfigureUsers, or
ConfigureManager, or ConfigureSelf". Currently, because it selects the
wrong overload, it computes to "User must have ConfigureUsers AND
ConfigureManager AND ConfigureSelf.
The double braces are supposed to cause this to form a vector of
Privileges, but it appears that the initializer list gets consumed, and
the single invocation of initializer list is called. Interestingly,
trying to put in a privileges overload of
intializer_list<initializer_list<const char*>> causes the compilation to
fail with an ambiguous call error, which is what I would've expected to
see previously in this case, but alas, I'm only a novice when it comes
to how the C++ standard works in these edge cases. This is likely due
in part to the fact that they were templates of an unused template param
(seemingly copied from the previous method) and SFINAE rules around
templates.
This commit functionally removes one of the privileges overloads, and
adds a second set of braces to every privileges call that previously had
a single set of braces. Previous code will not compile now, which is
IMO a good thing.
This likely popped up in the Node class removal, because the Node class
explicitly constructs a vector of Privilege objects, ensuing it can hit
the right overload
Tested:
Ran Redfish service validator
Tested the specific use case outlined on discord with:
Creating a new user with operator privilege:
```
redfishtool -S Always -u root -p 0penBmc -vvvvvvvvv -r 192.168.7.2
AccountService adduser foo mysuperPass1 Operator
```
Then attempting to list accounts:
```
curl -vvvv --insecure --user foo:mysuperPass1
https://192.168.7.2/redfish/v1/AccountService/Accounts/foo
```
Which succeeded and returned the account in question.
Signed-off-by: Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com>
Change-Id: I83e62b70e97f56dc57d43b9081f333a02fe85495
|
| H A D | dbus_monitor.hpp | 432a890c Mon Jun 14 17:28:56 CDT 2021 Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com> Remove ambiguous privileges constructor
There are a number of endpoints that assume that a given routes
privileges are governed by a single set of privileges, instead of
multiple sets ORed together. To handle this, there were two overloads
of the privileges() method, one that took a vector of Privileges, and
one that took an initializer_list of const char*. Unfortunately, this
leads some code in AccountService to pick the wrong overload when it's
called like this
.privileges( {{"ConfigureUsers"}, {"ConfigureManager"},
{"ConfigureSelf"}})
This is supposed to be "User must have ConfigureUsers, or
ConfigureManager, or ConfigureSelf". Currently, because it selects the
wrong overload, it computes to "User must have ConfigureUsers AND
ConfigureManager AND ConfigureSelf.
The double braces are supposed to cause this to form a vector of
Privileges, but it appears that the initializer list gets consumed, and
the single invocation of initializer list is called. Interestingly,
trying to put in a privileges overload of
intializer_list<initializer_list<const char*>> causes the compilation to
fail with an ambiguous call error, which is what I would've expected to
see previously in this case, but alas, I'm only a novice when it comes
to how the C++ standard works in these edge cases. This is likely due
in part to the fact that they were templates of an unused template param
(seemingly copied from the previous method) and SFINAE rules around
templates.
This commit functionally removes one of the privileges overloads, and
adds a second set of braces to every privileges call that previously had
a single set of braces. Previous code will not compile now, which is
IMO a good thing.
This likely popped up in the Node class removal, because the Node class
explicitly constructs a vector of Privilege objects, ensuing it can hit
the right overload
Tested:
Ran Redfish service validator
Tested the specific use case outlined on discord with:
Creating a new user with operator privilege:
```
redfishtool -S Always -u root -p 0penBmc -vvvvvvvvv -r 192.168.7.2
AccountService adduser foo mysuperPass1 Operator
```
Then attempting to list accounts:
```
curl -vvvv --insecure --user foo:mysuperPass1
https://192.168.7.2/redfish/v1/AccountService/Accounts/foo
```
Which succeeded and returned the account in question.
Signed-off-by: Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com>
Change-Id: I83e62b70e97f56dc57d43b9081f333a02fe85495
|
| H A D | obmc_console.hpp | 432a890c Mon Jun 14 17:28:56 CDT 2021 Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com> Remove ambiguous privileges constructor
There are a number of endpoints that assume that a given routes
privileges are governed by a single set of privileges, instead of
multiple sets ORed together. To handle this, there were two overloads
of the privileges() method, one that took a vector of Privileges, and
one that took an initializer_list of const char*. Unfortunately, this
leads some code in AccountService to pick the wrong overload when it's
called like this
.privileges( {{"ConfigureUsers"}, {"ConfigureManager"},
{"ConfigureSelf"}})
This is supposed to be "User must have ConfigureUsers, or
ConfigureManager, or ConfigureSelf". Currently, because it selects the
wrong overload, it computes to "User must have ConfigureUsers AND
ConfigureManager AND ConfigureSelf.
The double braces are supposed to cause this to form a vector of
Privileges, but it appears that the initializer list gets consumed, and
the single invocation of initializer list is called. Interestingly,
trying to put in a privileges overload of
intializer_list<initializer_list<const char*>> causes the compilation to
fail with an ambiguous call error, which is what I would've expected to
see previously in this case, but alas, I'm only a novice when it comes
to how the C++ standard works in these edge cases. This is likely due
in part to the fact that they were templates of an unused template param
(seemingly copied from the previous method) and SFINAE rules around
templates.
This commit functionally removes one of the privileges overloads, and
adds a second set of braces to every privileges call that previously had
a single set of braces. Previous code will not compile now, which is
IMO a good thing.
This likely popped up in the Node class removal, because the Node class
explicitly constructs a vector of Privilege objects, ensuing it can hit
the right overload
Tested:
Ran Redfish service validator
Tested the specific use case outlined on discord with:
Creating a new user with operator privilege:
```
redfishtool -S Always -u root -p 0penBmc -vvvvvvvvv -r 192.168.7.2
AccountService adduser foo mysuperPass1 Operator
```
Then attempting to list accounts:
```
curl -vvvv --insecure --user foo:mysuperPass1
https://192.168.7.2/redfish/v1/AccountService/Accounts/foo
```
Which succeeded and returned the account in question.
Signed-off-by: Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com>
Change-Id: I83e62b70e97f56dc57d43b9081f333a02fe85495
|
| /openbmc/bmcweb/include/ibm/ |
| H A D | management_console_rest.hpp | 432a890c Mon Jun 14 17:28:56 CDT 2021 Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com> Remove ambiguous privileges constructor
There are a number of endpoints that assume that a given routes
privileges are governed by a single set of privileges, instead of
multiple sets ORed together. To handle this, there were two overloads
of the privileges() method, one that took a vector of Privileges, and
one that took an initializer_list of const char*. Unfortunately, this
leads some code in AccountService to pick the wrong overload when it's
called like this
.privileges( {{"ConfigureUsers"}, {"ConfigureManager"},
{"ConfigureSelf"}})
This is supposed to be "User must have ConfigureUsers, or
ConfigureManager, or ConfigureSelf". Currently, because it selects the
wrong overload, it computes to "User must have ConfigureUsers AND
ConfigureManager AND ConfigureSelf.
The double braces are supposed to cause this to form a vector of
Privileges, but it appears that the initializer list gets consumed, and
the single invocation of initializer list is called. Interestingly,
trying to put in a privileges overload of
intializer_list<initializer_list<const char*>> causes the compilation to
fail with an ambiguous call error, which is what I would've expected to
see previously in this case, but alas, I'm only a novice when it comes
to how the C++ standard works in these edge cases. This is likely due
in part to the fact that they were templates of an unused template param
(seemingly copied from the previous method) and SFINAE rules around
templates.
This commit functionally removes one of the privileges overloads, and
adds a second set of braces to every privileges call that previously had
a single set of braces. Previous code will not compile now, which is
IMO a good thing.
This likely popped up in the Node class removal, because the Node class
explicitly constructs a vector of Privilege objects, ensuing it can hit
the right overload
Tested:
Ran Redfish service validator
Tested the specific use case outlined on discord with:
Creating a new user with operator privilege:
```
redfishtool -S Always -u root -p 0penBmc -vvvvvvvvv -r 192.168.7.2
AccountService adduser foo mysuperPass1 Operator
```
Then attempting to list accounts:
```
curl -vvvv --insecure --user foo:mysuperPass1
https://192.168.7.2/redfish/v1/AccountService/Accounts/foo
```
Which succeeded and returned the account in question.
Signed-off-by: Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com>
Change-Id: I83e62b70e97f56dc57d43b9081f333a02fe85495
|
| /openbmc/bmcweb/http/ |
| H A D | routing.hpp | 432a890c Mon Jun 14 17:28:56 CDT 2021 Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com> Remove ambiguous privileges constructor
There are a number of endpoints that assume that a given routes
privileges are governed by a single set of privileges, instead of
multiple sets ORed together. To handle this, there were two overloads
of the privileges() method, one that took a vector of Privileges, and
one that took an initializer_list of const char*. Unfortunately, this
leads some code in AccountService to pick the wrong overload when it's
called like this
.privileges( {{"ConfigureUsers"}, {"ConfigureManager"},
{"ConfigureSelf"}})
This is supposed to be "User must have ConfigureUsers, or
ConfigureManager, or ConfigureSelf". Currently, because it selects the
wrong overload, it computes to "User must have ConfigureUsers AND
ConfigureManager AND ConfigureSelf.
The double braces are supposed to cause this to form a vector of
Privileges, but it appears that the initializer list gets consumed, and
the single invocation of initializer list is called. Interestingly,
trying to put in a privileges overload of
intializer_list<initializer_list<const char*>> causes the compilation to
fail with an ambiguous call error, which is what I would've expected to
see previously in this case, but alas, I'm only a novice when it comes
to how the C++ standard works in these edge cases. This is likely due
in part to the fact that they were templates of an unused template param
(seemingly copied from the previous method) and SFINAE rules around
templates.
This commit functionally removes one of the privileges overloads, and
adds a second set of braces to every privileges call that previously had
a single set of braces. Previous code will not compile now, which is
IMO a good thing.
This likely popped up in the Node class removal, because the Node class
explicitly constructs a vector of Privilege objects, ensuing it can hit
the right overload
Tested:
Ran Redfish service validator
Tested the specific use case outlined on discord with:
Creating a new user with operator privilege:
```
redfishtool -S Always -u root -p 0penBmc -vvvvvvvvv -r 192.168.7.2
AccountService adduser foo mysuperPass1 Operator
```
Then attempting to list accounts:
```
curl -vvvv --insecure --user foo:mysuperPass1
https://192.168.7.2/redfish/v1/AccountService/Accounts/foo
```
Which succeeded and returned the account in question.
Signed-off-by: Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com>
Change-Id: I83e62b70e97f56dc57d43b9081f333a02fe85495
|