search

tux3 / jenkins-autoarmor

AppArmor confinement for Jenkins jobs
4 stars 2 forks source link

Recommended method to grant specific permission to a certain job #6

Closed optimumtact closed 8 years ago

optimumtact commented 8 years ago

The antox build jobs would need access to the android key store for signing. Is it recommended to grant those in their apparmour config files?

is there any way to pattern match on job name in the genprof?

GrayHatter commented 8 years ago

maybe it would be better to build on jenkins, and sign somewhere else? If I'm not mistaken, the repo server is separate from jenkins, and for security we're now pulling from jenkins, instead of pushing to? If that's the case, we should just sign on the repo server. And developers who want to use jenkins packages to build, will have to sign on their own systems?

tux3 commented 8 years ago

It should be possible to specify the location of the android key store to the build system, so that you can put the keys and the keystore in the workspace, where only the corresponding job can access them.

It might be a better idea to not sign on Jenkins at all.

Zer0-One commented 8 years ago

The plan is to move builds to the package server and sign them there.

tux3 commented 8 years ago

Some permissions required to build Android software have been added to the config files so this shouldn't be an issue anymore.

Granting extra privileges based on pattern matched names doesn't seem very secure, as any existing job could just change their name to match the pattern and get the permissions, we might as well add the permissions globally to keep the security model simple. Granting privileges to a specific job by editing its config file directly on the target machine is still safe, though, because there cannot be name collisions.